Sri. Ritvik Murali Dhar, Shivamogga V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-1 & TPS , Shivamogga

ITA 1122/BANG/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0023 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 11-08-2024
• Assessment Year: 2016-2017
• Appeal Filed On: 03-06-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SHRISHIR S. RAO

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV, JUDICIALMEMBER ITA No. Assessment YearDIN Number 1120/Bang/20242011-12 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055399501(1) 1121/Bang/20242016-17 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055052335(1) 1122/Bang/20242016-17 ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2023-24/1055052720(1) Shri. Ritvik Murali Dhar, # Shankar Traders, Kuvempur Road, Rathna Arcade, Shivamogga – 577 201. PAN :BIPPD 7198 L Vs. DCIT, Circle – 5(3)(1), Bengaluru. APPELLANTRESPONDENT Assessee by:Shri.Shrishir S. Rao, Advocate Revenue by:Shri. Subrmanian S, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bengaluru. Date of hearing : 12.08.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 16.08.2024 O R D E R Per Bench:- All these appeals, details mentioned above, related to Assessment Years 2011-12, 2016-17. At the outset, learned Counsel for the assessee argued that there is a delay of 284 days in filing of the present appeals. Pointing out the reason for delay, learned Counsel for the assessee has drawn the attention of the Bench towards para 3 of the affidavit filed by the assessee. Learned DR opposed the delay application. 2. After considering the submissions of the assessee, we observe that the email ID of the assessee was hacked by the hackers, as stated by assessee in his affidavit and that is why assessee was not opening the email to which the CIT(A) has sent the Orders. We are of the view that there was a reasonable cause for not filing the appeals in due time. Hence, we condone the delay and admit these appeals. ITA Nos.1120 to 1122/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 3 . 3. On merits, the Counsel for the assessee pointed out that all these 3 orders of the CIT(A) are ex-parte. Learned Counsel for the assessee craved that these matters may be restored to the files of CIT(A) for deciding afresh. 4. Learned DR supported the Orders of the authorities below. 5. After considering the rival submissions, we observe that the CIT(A) has issued 2 notices initially during the period of covid-19 i.e., on 09.03.2020 and 14.01.2021. Third notice was issued assessee on 27.07.2023 during which period the assessee was not operating his email account due to the fear of hackers. It is also observed that CIT(A) has decided the appeals ignoring the purport of section 260(6) of the Act, which section provide that the CIT(A) should decide each and every point disputed in the appeal and should also give a reason for his view. However, in this case, the CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we remit all these matters to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding afresh in accordance with law. 6. In the result, the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court on the date mentioned on the caption page. Sd/- Sd/- (WASEEM AHMED)(PRAKASH CHAND YADAV) Accountant MemberJudicial Member Bangalore. Dated: 16.08.2024. /NS/* ITA Nos.1120 to 1122/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 3 . Copy to: 1.Appellants2. Respondent 3.DRP4.CIT 5.CIT(A) 6. DR,ITAT, Bangalore. 7. Guard file By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore.