Mr. Vivek Rajendra Bikarnakatte, Mangaluru V. Assistant Commissioner Of Income Tax, Central Circle-2, Mangaluru

ITA 348/BANG/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6109 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 03-05-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: V. SRINIVASAN
• Section: 132; 144; 153A

Judgement Text

ITA Nos.348 to 354/Bang/2022 Mr. Vivek Rajendra Bikarnakatte, Mangaluru IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A’’ BENCH: BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos.348 to 354/Bang/2022 Assessment Year: 2011-12 TO 2017-18 Mr. Vivek Rajendra Bikarnakatte #1-24/1, Panama House Kuloor Kavoor Airport Road Panjimogaru Mangaluru 575 013 PAN NO : AMSPB8241J Vs. ACIT Central Circle-2 Mangaluru APPELLANT RESPONDENT Appellant by : Shri v. Srinivasan, A.R. Respondent by : Shri G. Manoj Kumar, D.R. Date of Hearing : 18.07.2022 Date of Pronouncement : 18.07.2022 O R D E R PER BENCH: These appeals by assessee are directed against different orders of CIT(A)-2, Panaji dated 27.1.2022 for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2017-18. 2. In this case, there were search u/s 132 of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] on 1.2.2017. Consequent to search, notice u/s 153A of the Act was issued requesting the assessee to file returns of income for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17. Inspite of several notices, the assessee has not filed any return of income. The AO completed assessment for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2016-17 u/s 144 r.w.s. 153A of the Act and for the assessment year 2017-18 u/s 144 of the Act. Against this assessee carried the appeals before Ld. CIT(A) challenging the various ITA Nos.348 to 354/Bang/2022 Mr. Vivek Rajendra Bikarnakatte, Mangaluru Page 2 of 3 additions made by the AO and also passing assessment orders without giving opportunity of hearing to the assessee. Before Ld. CIT(A) also, assessee has not participated even after giving two notices of hearing i.e. one on 4.1.2022 and another on 22.1.2022. Against this, assessee came in appeal before us challenging not giving effective opportunity of hearing to him and also challenging the various additions made by the AO as confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) in these assessment years. 3. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly, Ld. CIT(A)-2 issued notices of hearing on 4.1.22 & 22.1.22. This period is covered by COVID Pandemic and assessee was not able to avail the opportunity given to him. Being so, it is appropriate to remit the issue in dispute to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide it afresh after giving fresh hearing of notices to the assessee and decide the issue on merit. The Ld. CIT(A) is also directed to call for the remand report from the AO as the assessment orders passed ex-parte by AO. Since we have decided the issue with regard to non-giving of opportunity to the assessee, we refrain from going into other grounds of appeal raised by the assessee before us. 4. In the result, all the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 18 th Jul, 2022 Sd/- (Beena Pillai) Judicial Member Sd/- (Chandra Poojari) Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated 18 th Jul, 2022. VG/SPS ITA Nos.348 to 354/Bang/2022 Mr. Vivek Rajendra Bikarnakatte, Mangaluru Page 3 of 3 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.