MATS N MORE,ALAPPUZHA V. ITO, WARD 1& TPS, ALAPPUZHA

ITA 282/COCH/2024

AI Insights

The case involves M/s. Mats N More, a company engaged in the manufacture of coir mats, which appealed against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, concerning the assessment year 2018-19. The appeal was initially delayed by 120 days due to the death of the Chartered Accountant who managed the appeal process and the use of his email ID for communication, despite specific requests not to use it for such purposes. The Tribunal found that the notices sent to the deceased's email could not have been viewed by the Chartered Accountant, leading to the non-appearance of the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). Consequently, the Tribunal condoned the delay and remitted the case back to the Ld.CIT(A) for a fresh evaluation.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 396848 (ITAT-COCHIN)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-05-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: LEENA LAL; SNR
• Assessee Lawyers: PARVATHY AMMAL
• Keywords: Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 40(a)(ia)

Judgement Text

"IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL COCHIN BENCH : COCHIN BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 282/Coch/2024 Assessment Year : 2018-19 M/s. Mats N More, 402 Mats N More, Valavanadu, Alappuzha – 688 522. PAN: ABAFM7563K Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Ward – 1 & TPS, Alappuzha. APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Smt. Parvathy Ammal, CA Revenue by : Smt. Leena Lal, Snr. AR Date of Hearing : 12-03-2025 Date of Pronouncement : 27-05-2025 ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 04/10/2023 in respect of the A.Y. 2018-19. 2. This appeal was filed with a delay of 120 days and the assessee also filed an application to condone the said delay. In the said application, the assessee submitted that while filing the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A), the Chartered Accountant has given his email ID and specifically requested not to send the notices through the said email. After filing the said appeal, the Chartered Accountant also passed away on 20/05/2021 and the assessee Page 2 of 3 ITA No. 282/Coch/2024 also enclosed the death certificate of the Chartered Accountant and further submitted that only when the AO issued a demand notice, the assessee came to know about the disposal of the appeal on 04/10/2023 and therefore the present appeal has been filed by the assessee with a delay of 120 days and prayed to condone the said delay. 3. We have considered the said submissions and admittedly, the notices were sent through the email mentioned in form 35 and even though the assessee had requested that no notices would be sent on the said email ID. Further, the Chartered Accountant, also passed away on 20/05/2021 and therefore the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A) to the above said email ID mentioned in form 35 after the demise of the Chartered Accountant could not have been viewed by the Chartered Accountant. Therefore, we accept the reasons given by the assessee for the said delay and condone the delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal and proceeded to take up the appeal on merits. 4. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company engaged in the manufacture of coir mats. The assessee filed their return of income on 21/10/2018. Thereafter the assessment was completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. The AO after verifying the information filed along with the return of income, had disallowed 30% on the income u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Because of some mistakes committed by the auditor, the assessment has been completed by making disallowance even though the auditor has communicated about the mistakes. As against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). But unfortunately, the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A) was not received by the assessee since the auditor whose email ID was given in form 35 passed away on 20/05/2021. Therefore the Ld.CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal for not submitting any written submissions in support of the grounds of appeal filed by the assessee. The said ex-parte order was challenged by the assessee before this Tribunal. Page 3 of 3 ITA No. 282/Coch/2024 5. We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record. 6. The Ld.AR at the time of hearing, submitted that the auditor has filed the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and specifically stated that the communications need not be sent through the email ID mentioned in form 35. When the appeal was pending before the Ld.CIT(A), the auditor also passed away on 20/05/2021 and therefore the notices sent through the email ID mentioned in form 35 could not have been communicated to the assessee. Therefore, there is a valid justification for the non-appearance by the assessee before the Ld.CIT(A). 7. We, therefore, set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and remit this issue back to the Ld.CIT(A) for denovo consideration, after hearing the assessee. 8. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 27th May, 2025. Sd/- Sd/- (INTURI RAMA RAO) (SOUNDARARAJAN K.) Accountant Member Judicial Member Cochin, Dated, the 27th May, 2025. /MS / Copy to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Cochin 5. Guard file 6. CIT(A) By order Assistant Registrar, ITAT, Cochin "