TERESIAN COLLEGE,MYSORE V. INCOME TAX OFFICER EXEMPTION WARD MYSORE, MYSORE

ITA 492/BANG/2025

AI Insights

This case involves an appeal by M/s Teresian College against an order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for the assessment year 2017-18. The appeal was initially delayed by 91 days due to the assessee's unfamiliarity with faceless appellate proceedings and incorrect email notifications regarding the hearing dates. The Tribunal found that the assessee had valid reasons for the delay, including the non-receipt of notices and the final order due to them being sent to incorrect email addresses. Consequently, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay and restore the matter to the AO for a fresh assessment.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 669535 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-06-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: REVENUE; GANESH R GHALE; STANDING
• Assessee Lawyers: SIDDESH NAGARAJ GADDI
• Section: 144

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC, BENCH, BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI KESHAV DUBEY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 492/Bang/2025 Assessment Year: 2017-18 M/s Teresian College, St. Teresas Education Society, Teresian College, TN Pura Road, Siddarthanagar, Mysore. PAN – AABTT 1948 F Vs. The Income Tax Officer, Exemptions Ward, Mysore. . APPELLANT RESPONDENT Assessee by : Shri Siddesh Nagaraj Gaddi, CA Revenue by : Ms. Ganesh R Ghale, Advocate, Standing Counsel for Revenue Date of hearing : 16.06.2025 Date of Pronouncement : 25.06.2025 O R D E R PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by NFAC, Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18. 2. At the threshold, the ld. AR before us submitted that there is a delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT for 91 days. The assessee has filed an Affidavit explaining the reasons for the delay by stating that the assessee was subjected to faceless appellate proceedings for the first ITA No.492/Bang/2025 Page 2 of 3 . time. As such, the assessee was not aware of the proceedings how they are conducted under face less circumstances. Accordingly, the assessee could not keep a check on the IT portal. The assessee became aware of the disposal of ld. CIT(A) order on receipt of penalty notices dated 10/01/2025. Thus, the assessee immediately filed an appeal before the ITAT but in this process a delay has occurred for 91 days. 3. In addition to the above, the ld. AR submitted the previous 2 notices out of 4 notices were issued to the wrong email.id, which can be verified from the evidence placed on record. As such, the assessee was not aware of the latest notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). Similarly, there was no service of the order of ld. CIT(A) at the email.ID of the assessee. The assessee has downloaded the order of the ld. CIT(A) form the IT portal, which was verified in connection with the penalty notice issued dated 10/01/2025. Accordingly, the ld. AR prayed before us to condone the delay. 4. On the other hand, the ld. DR vehemently opposed to condone the delay in filing the appeal of the assessee. 5. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. On perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A), we note that the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee for non-prosecution in view of the fact that there was no response received from the assessee for the notices issued by him intimating the date of hearing. From the reading of the above stated facts, it is transpired that the assessee was unaware of the proceedings before the ld. CIT(A) and, therefore, consequently the assessee was ITA No.492/Bang/2025 Page 3 of 3 . unaware of the order passed by the ld. CIT(A), which eventually resulted in the delay for filing appeal before the ITAT. Evidently the last two notices were issued by the ld. CIT(A) intimating the date at the wrong email.id. Thus, we find that there was valid reason for the assessee for non-appearance before the ld. CIT(A) and consequential delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT is also justified. Accordingly, in the interest of justice and fair play, we condone the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee and restore the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law. Hence, the issue is restored to the AO for the reason that the order passed by the AO was u/s 144 of the Act. Hence, the grounds of appeal of the assessee are hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes. 6. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is hereby partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in court on 25th day of June, 2025 Sd/- Sd/- (KESHAV DUBEY) (WASEEM AHMED) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore Dated, 25th June, 2025 / vms / 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 "