Case Law Details
Satish Panduranga Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Satish Panduranga filed an appeal before the ITAT Bangalore against the order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2017-18. The AO had made an addition of Rs. 6,29,94,000 during the financial year 2016-17 based on non-reply to a notice issued during the assessment proceedings. The NFAC confirmed the AO’s order as the assessee had not complied with the notices. The assessee requested one more opportunity to present their case before the NFAC.
The ITAT Bangalore considered the submission of the assessee that they were not well-educated and had no knowledge of the Income Tax ITBA portal, leading to non-compliance with the notices. The ITAT granted the request for another opportunity and remitted the entire issue back to the AO for a fresh order after hearing the assessee.
The ITAT Bangalore partly allowed the appeal of Satish Panduranga and directed the re-adjudication of the case. The addition made by the AO based on non-reply to a notice during the assessment proceedings will be reconsidered after providing the assessee with an opportunity to present their case before the NFAC.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
This appeal by assessee is directed against order passed by NFAC u/s 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 [‘the Act’ for short] for the assessment year 2017-18 dated 28.2.2023.
2. Facts of the case are that the ld. AO passed the assessment order by ex-parte on 21.12.2019, wherein he made addition of Rs.6,29,94,000/- during the financial year 2016-17. Against this assessee filed appeal before NFAC. The NFAC fixed the case for hearing as follows:
| S. No. | Hearing notice dated | Hearing date | Remarks |
| 1 | Notice dated 2.1.2021 |
15.01.2021 | Request for adjournment |
| 2 | Notice dated 10. 1.2023 |
16.0 1.2023 | No compliance |
| 3 | Notice dated 17.01.2023 |
23.01.2023 | Form 35, Grounds of appeal, copy of challan filed |
| 4 | Notice dated 24.1.2023 |
30.0 1.2023 | No compliance |
2.1 There was no compliance from the assessee’s end. Hence, the NFAC confirmed the order of AO passed u/s 144 of the Act. Against this assessee is in appeal before us. The ld. A.R. submitted that assessee is not well educated and having no knowledge of Income Tax ITBA portal and hence, the assessee has not complied certain notices issued by the NFAC. The ld. A.R. requested for one more opportunity to present the assessee’s case before NFAC.
2.2 We accede to the request of ld. Counsel for the assessee. Accordingly, we remit the entire issue in dispute to the file of AO to pass an order after hearing the assessee.
3.In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 7th June, 2023
