Hanumantappa Chandrappa Prabhakara, Bengaluru V. The ACIT, C-3(2)(1), Bengaluru

ITA 1063/BANG/2022

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Sri Hanumantappa Chandrappa Prabhakara against the order of the CIT(A) dated 01.09.2022 for the assessment year 2016-2017. The appeal was initially dismissed ex parte by the CIT(A) due to non-compliance with notices for written submissions. The assessee's representative argued that there was a misunderstanding regarding the service of notices after the appeal migrated to the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), leading to non-intimation about the notices. The Tribunal, considering the circumstances, decided to restore the case to the CIT(A) for a fresh hearing.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 115222 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-01-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 17-01-2023
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 20-11-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Bonafide belief

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCHES “B”, BANGALORE Before Shri George George K, JM & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu, AM ITA No.1063/Bang/2022 : Asst.Year 2016-2017 Sri.Hanumantappa Chandrappa Prabhakara No.63, KPA Block Sun Grace 1 st Main 6 th Cross Chandra Layout Bengaluru – 560 040. PAN : AOGPP1486B. v. The Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 3(2)(1) Bangalore. (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant by : Sri.S.V.Ravishankar, Advocate Respondent by : Sri.Gudimella V.P.Pavan Kumar, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 18.01.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 18.01.2023 O R D E R Per George George K, JM : This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(A)’s order dated 01.09.2022. The relevant assessment year is 2016-2017. 2. At the very outset, we noticed that the appeal preferred by the assessee before the first appellate authority was dismissed ex parte. The CIT(A) noted that the assessee was given four opportunities to submit written submissions. However, since there was no compliance to the notices, the appeal was decided ex parte. 3. The learned AR submitted that on the first instance it was physical hearing and the Authorized Representative of the assessee had appeared before the first appellate authority ITA No.1063/Bang/2022. Sri Hanumantappa Chandrappa Prabhakara. 2 and sought for an adjournment. Later, the appeal migrated to National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) and consequently the notices were issued online. It was submitted that the assessee was under the bonafide belief that notices were served to the AR and hence did not intimate the AR with regard to the date of notice issued. Therefore, it was prayed that the matter may be restored to the CIT(A) for the assessee to present his case. 4. The learned Departmental Representative present supported the orders of the AO / CIT(A). 5. We have heard rival submissions and perused the material on record. The CIT(A) had issued notices for online submissions on four occasions. Since there was no compliance, the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee. On the first notice issued, the assessee’s AR appeared and sought for an adjournment. However, with regard to the other three notices, it is submitted that the same were issued to the email portal of the assessee and since the assessee was under the bonafide belief that the notices were also served on the AR, he failed to intimae the AR. 6. We are of the view that in the interest of justice and equity, one more opportunity should be granted to the assessee for an effective representation of his case. Therefore, we restore the matter to the files of the CIT(A). The CIT(A) is directed to afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee shall cooperate with the CIT(A) and ITA No.1063/Bang/2022. Sri Hanumantappa Chandrappa Prabhakara. 3 shall not seek unnecessary adjournment. It is ordered accordingly. 7. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on this 18 th day of January, 2023. Sd/- (Laxmi Prasad Sahu) Sd/- (George George K) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Bangalore; Dated : 18 th January, 2023. Devadas G* Copy to : 1. The Appellant. 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-NFAC Delhi 4. The Pr.CIT, Bengaluru. 5. The DR, ITAT, Bengaluru. 6. Guard File. Asst.Registrar/ITAT, Bangalore