LOHITT VIJAYACHANDRARAJEURS URS,HINKAL KARNATAKA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1 (1) MYSORE, MYSORE

ITA 491/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves appeals by the assessee, Shri Lohitt Vijayachandrarajeurs Urs, against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the assessment years 2015-16 and 2018-19. The appeals were initially filed with significant delays, which the Tribunal condoned based on the assessee's lack of knowledge of the Income Tax provisions and infrequent use of the email ID associated with the notices. The primary contention in the appeals was the assessee's inability to appear before the CIT(A) due to not regularly checking his email, leading to the dismissal of his appeals by the CIT(A) without merit consideration. The Tribunal, acknowledging the assessee's circumstances and the substantive documents he possessed, decided to grant another opportunity for the assessee to present his case before the CIT(A).

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 315525 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: N. BALUSAMY
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDESH NAGARAJ
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘A’ BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA Nos. 490 & 491/Bang/2025 Assessment Years : 2015-16 & 2018-19 Shri Lohitt Vijayachandrarajeurs Urs, No. 576 No. 576, Hinkal Post, Hinkal – 570 017. PAN: ABQPL6711J Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1(1), Mysore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CA Revenue by : Shri N. Balusamy, JCIT-DR Date of Hearing : 14-05-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 16-05-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER These are the appeals filed by the assessee challenging the orders of the NFAC, Delhi dated 12/01/2024 and 27/02/2024 in respect of the A.Ys. 2015-16 and 2018-19 respectively. 2. Both these appeals are related to the same assessee and therefore we decided to take up both the appeals together and pass a common order for the sake of convenience. Page 2 of 3 ITA Nos. 490 & 491/Bang/2025 3. The assessee filed the present appeals with a delay of 360 days for A.Y. 2015-16 and 314 days for A.Y. 2018-19 and also enclosed an affidavit for condoning the said delay. The assessee submitted that he has no knowledge about the Income Tax provisions and he is not actively using the email ID to which the notices were sent. He came to know about the CIT order only after receiving the recovery notices and thereafter verified the mail and filed the appeals before the Tribunal on 06/03/2025 and prayed to condone the said delay of 360 days and 314 days in filing the appeals before this Tribunal. 4. We have considered the said submissions made by the assessee and in the interest of justice, we are condoning the said delay in filing the appeals and proceeded to take up the main appeals for hearing. 5. The Ld.AR brought to our notice as against the additions, the assessee is having supporting documents but unfortunately the assessee could not be able to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) since the assessee was not regular in opening the email ID and therefore not appeared before the Ld.CIT(A) and prayed one more opportunity to appear before the Ld.CIT(A). 6. The Ld.DR relied on the order of the lower authorities and prayed to dismiss the appeal. 7. In both the assessment years, the Ld.CIT(A) had issued several notices to the assessee through the email details available in the portal. We have also considered the submissions made by the assessee that he is not conversant with the IT proceedings as well as have no knowledge about operating the computer systems. Admittedly, in this case, the Ld.CIT(A) had not decided the issue on merits but dismissed the appeals because the assessee had not appeared before him inspite of the several notices issued to him through the email. Page 3 of 3 ITA Nos. 490 & 491/Bang/2025 8. We have considered the request made by the assessee that one more opportunity is to be granted so that he will appear and produce the various documents in support of his case that the additions made were not required to be added as income. In the interest of justice we are accepting the prayer of the assessee and grant one opportunity to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) with the available documents to decide the issue on merits and in accordance with law. We therefore set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the matters to the Ld.CIT(A) for considering the issue on merits after hearing the assessee. 9. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 16th May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) Accountant Member Judicial Member Bangalore, Dated, the 16th May, 2025. /MS / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Bangalore 5. Guard file 6. CIT(A) By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Bangalore "