MANASA EDUCATION TRUST (R),MANDYA V. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1 & TPS, MANDYA

ITA 372/BANG/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Manasa Education Trust, an educational institution managed by a trust, appealing against an order passed by the NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2020-21. The appeal was initially filed with a delay of 178 days, attributed to the Department's error in using an incorrect email ID for communication. The Tribunal found that the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to be heard, violating the principles of natural justice and section 250(6) of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the matter to the AO for re-assessment, ensuring proper communication in the future.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 705518 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-07-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Assessment Year: 2020-2021
• Other Referred Cases: Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Matter Remanded
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUBRAMANIAN S
• Assessee Lawyers: THARUN KOTHARI
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause; Principle of natural justice
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘B’ BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 372/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Manasa Education Trust R. Desagarahalli Maddur Taluk, Mandya – 571 419. PAN – AAJTS 2806 D Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1 & TPS, Mandya. . APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Tharun Kothari, CA Revenue by : Shri Subramanian S, JCIT Date of hearing : 19.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 02.07.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 12/06/2024 in DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/ 250/2024-25/1065605511(1) for the assessment year 2020-21. 2. The appeal has been filed with a delay of 178 days. The assessee has submitted an affidavit dated 25-04-2025 along with a petition for condonation of delay. As per the affidavit, the assessee is an educational institution managed by a trust. The principal who was appointed on 20- 06-2022, states that during the course of first appellate proceedings, all ITA No.372/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 4 . statutory notices were sent to an incorrect e-mail ID: [e-mail]. It is explained that this was not the e-mail address provided to the ld. CIT(A). The correct and authorized e-mail ID furnished by the assessee in Form 35 was [e-mail]. Because of this error, the assessee never received any notice of hearing from the Department. As a result, the appeal was completed ex-parte by the ld. CIT-A, dismissing the same without providing the assessee any opportunity of being heard. 4. The assessee came to know about the adverse orders only in the last week of January 2025, after receiving a telephonic call and later checking the Income Tax portal. Immediately thereafter, steps were taken to file the present appeal. 5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. The delay in filing the appeal has been reasonably explained, and there is no indication of wilful default or negligence. The delay is mainly due to communication error caused by the Department using a wrong e-mail ID. Once the assessee became aware, it acted promptly to seek redressal. Under section 253(5) of the Act, the Tribunal is empowered to condone delay where sufficient cause is shown. The facts of this case constitute a genuine and reasonable cause. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition v. Mst. Katiji (1987) 167 ITR 471 (SC) has laid down that a liberal approach must be taken when substantial justice is at stake. In light of the above, the delay of 178 days is condoned. ITA No.372/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 4 . 5.1 Since the ld. CIT(A)’s order was passed without proper service of notice and in violation of the principles of natural justice and the mandate of section 250(6) of the Act, the same cannot be sustained. Further, the ex-parte assessment under section 144 also requires reconsideration after giving the assessee due opportunity. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for fresh adjudication in accordance with law. 5.2 The AO is directed to issue all future notices and communications to the new e-mail ID furnished in Form 36: [e-mail], and to any other updated address as may be confirmed in writing by the assessee. 5.3 The assessee shall co-operate fully with the proceedings and respond to all communications in a timely manner. The AO shall also grant reasonable opportunity to the assessee to present its case and submit the required documents. Hence, the ground of appeal of the assessee is hereby allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 2nd day of July, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 2nd July, 2025 / vms / ITA No.372/Bang/2025 Page 4 of 4 . 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 "