ESHWARARAO RAVI,NANDINI LAYOUT V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(2)(2), BANGALORE

ITA 1883/BANG/2024

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by the assessee, Eshwararao Ravi, against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2014-15. The primary contention was the non-consideration of various documents submitted by the assessee, including a sale deed, release deed, and gift deed, which were crucial for the appeal. The CIT(A) had confirmed the order of the Assessing Officer (AO) ex-parte, citing non-communication from the assessee's side, despite the notices issued. The Tribunal noted procedural lapses in the handling of the appeal and the issuance of notices, leading to the decision to remand the case back to the CIT(A) for a comprehensive re-evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 471033 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 14-11-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 04-11-2024
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 14-09-2024
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: V PARITHIVEL
• Keywords: Set aside; Gift

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘C’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 1883/Bang/2024 Assessment Year: 2014-15 Eshwararao Ravi, D-79, 2nd Circula Road, Doller Scheme, Nandini Layout, S.O., Bangalore North, Bangalore-560 010. PAN – BHFPR 6579 C Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 2(2)(2), Bengaluru APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri V Parithivel, JCIT Date of hearing : 04.11.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 11.11.2024 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 10/01/2024 vide DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/ 2023-24/1059537863(1) for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The assessee has filed the adjournment petition stating that he is in search of a new tax consultant. However, the ld. DR at the time of hearing submitted that the assessee did not appear before the CIT(A) and, therefore, the ld. CIT(A) has confirmed the order of the AO ex- parte to the assessee. ITA No.1883/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 3 . 3. The ld. DR graciously submitted that in the interest of justice the matter may be set aside to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. 4. On perusal of the records available before, us we note that the assessee along with the appeal filed in Form – 35 before the ld. CIT(A) has filed numerous documents such as sale deed, release deed and gift deed along with the statement of facts and grounds of appeal. However, the ld. CIT(A) without considering these documents has confirmed the order of the AO by holding that there was no communication from the side of the assessee despite the notices were issued to the assessee intimating the date of hearing. In this regard, we note that under provisions of sec. 250(6) of the Act mandates that the ld. CIT(A) requires to dispose of the appeal with the reasoning. As such, the ld. CIT(A) without considering the documents filed along with the appeal has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, which is contrary to the provisions of sec. 250(6) of the Act. 5. Nevertheless, we note that the appeal was instituted by the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) dated 11/04/2022 and the notices were issued intimating the date of hearing in the month of October and November 2023 after a gap of 18 months. A such, we note that 4 notices were issued intimating the date of hearing in a period of 50 days approximately which does not appear proper in the given facts and circumstances. ITA No.1883/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 3 . 6. Considering all the facts stated above, we are of the view that the ld. CIT(A) should have extended one more opportunity to the assessee. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we set aside the issue to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. Hence, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 11th day of November, 2024 Sd/- Sd/- (PRAKASH CHAND YADAV) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 11th November, 2024 / vms / Copy to: 1. The Applicant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR, ITAT, Bangalore. 6. Guard file By order Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "