M/S. VIVA MAGNA WHEELERS PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU V. DCIT, CIRCLE-7(1)(1), BENGALURU

ITA 2157/BANG/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Viva Magna Wheelers Pvt. Ltd., a private limited company engaged in the business of automobile dealership and service, which filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. The assessee had declared a total loss in its return of income for the assessment year 2020-21, which was scrutinized, leading to various additions to its income. The FAA dismissed the assessee's appeal due to non-response to notices, despite them being delivered to the assessee's email IDs. The Tribunal noted that the email IDs belonged to different departments of the assessee, which might have led to the oversight in responding to the notices. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to provide another opportunity to the assessee to present its case before the FAA, under the condition of strict compliance with future requirements.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 43508 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: RAVISHANKAR S.V

Judgement Text

"IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “B” BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI. LAXMI PRASAD SAHU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI. SOUNDARARAJAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.2157/Bang/2024 Assessment Year : 2020-21 M/s. Viva Magna Wheelers Pvt. Ltd., 372 Nilay, R T Nagar Main Road R T Nagar, Bangalore – 560 032. PAN :AADCV 2343 K Vs. DCIT, Circle –7(1)(1), Bangalore. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri. Ravishankar S. V, Advocate Revenue by : Shri. Subramanian, JCIT(DR)(ITAT), Bangalore. Date of hearing : 17.12.2024 Date of Pronouncement : 17.02.2025 ORDER Per Laxmi Prasad Sahu, Accountant Member : This appeal filed by the assessee is against the Order passed by theCIT(A) vide DIN and Order No.ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1068599606(1) dated 12.09.2024. 2. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that assessee a private limited company engaged in the business of dealership and service providers in automobiles filed return of income on 30.01.2021 declaring total loss of Rs.2,39,91,046/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices were issued to the assessee. During the course of assessment proceedings, various notices were issued to the assessee but assessee partly replied on 01.12.2021. ITA No.2157/Bang/2024 Page 2 of 3 There was no response from the assessee's side later. Accordingly, the AO completed the assessment on the basis of the materials available before him and made various additions on three counts as per computation of income at Sr. no. 3 to 5 of Rs. 1,03,79,897/- and there was income computed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act of Rs.67,62,540/-. Resultantly the income was determined at Rs. 1,71,42,437/- 3. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee filed appeal before the first appellate authority (FAA). During the course of appellate proceedings, the ld. FAA issued notices on the emails IDs provided by the assessee which were delivered to the assessee. However, there was no response which is clear from para 4.1 of the ld. FAA’s Order. Accordingly, dismissed appeal of the assessee and decided the issue on merits of the case and partly allowed the appeal. 4. Aggrieved from the above Order, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Counsel for the assessee submitted that the email IDs provided by the assessee in Form 36 as well as the information available with the Department belongs to various departments of the assessee company. The assessee has various departments like sales, service centres, human resources. Therefore, assessee could not give proper attention in spite of the service of notice. The learned Counsel for the assessee undertook that if a chance is given to the assessee, assessee shall comply with the requirement of the notices and submitted that correct email ID is provided in Form 36 being [e-mail] and requested that CIT(A) may send notices on this email ID. 5. Learned DR objected to the plea of the assessee stating that assessee was provided opportunities to represent its case before the lower authorities. 6. Considering the rival submissions, we noted that during the course of assessment proceedings, there was no proper representation from the assessee. ITA No.2157/Bang/2024 Page 3 of 3 Accordingly, the AO has made addition under different heads and has also confirmed the addition made under section 143(1)(a) of the Act noted supra. During the course of appellate proceedings before the ld. FAA there was no proper response inspite of the service of notices. Since the learned Counsel for the assessees ubmitted that the email provided belongs to different branches of the assessee, therefore, assessee could not give proper attention. The learned Counsel for the assessee has submitted proper email ID in Form 36. Therefore, in the interest of justice, one more opportunity is provided to the assessee to represent its case before the ld. FAA. In case assessee does not comply with the requirements of the Revenue, no second chance or leniency shall be given to the assessee. 7. In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the court on the date mentioned on the caption page. Sd/- Sd/- Sd/- (SOUNDARARAJAN K) (LAXMI PRASAD SAHU) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dated : 17.02.2025. /NS/* Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. Pr.CIT4.CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, Bangalore. By order Assistant Registrar ITAT, Bangalore. "