Guru Thipperudraswamy Devasthana Vs ITO (ITAT Bangalore)
Non-receipt of notice & demise of CA is sufficient cause for non-compliance: ITAT Bangalore
ITAT Bangalore held that non-compliance due to non-receipt of notices as served on different email ID and demise of Chartered Accountant is sufficient cause. Accordingly, issue restored back to the file of AO.
Facts-
This appeal is filed by Sri Guru Thipperudraswamy Devasthana (the assessee/appellant) for the assessment year 2017-18 against the appellate order passed by the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) [ld. CIT(A)] dated 25.9.2024 wherein the appeal of the assessee against the best judgment assessment order u/s. 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 dated 16.12.2019 by the ITO was dismissed as assessee failed to respond to 4 different notices issued by the ld. CIT(A). The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for want of explanation as well as on merits also.
Conclusion-
On appeal before the learned CIT – A in form number 35 the assessee mentioned a particular email ID. The first notice issued by the learned CIT – A on 30/12/2020 was on a different email ID then was mentioned in form number 35. In the second notice issued on 7/11/2022, the notices were sent on three different email ID. Of course, in these three email ids one of the email ID was that was mentioned in form number 35. In the notice dated 7/7/2023, the notice was sent to a different email ID which was not mentioned in the earlier notices by the learned CIT–A. Further one notice dated 20/8/2024 was also sent on email ID to which notices were sent on 7/7/2023. Therefore, in fact except one notice dated 7/11/2022, none of the notices were sent on the email ID mentioned by the assessee in form number 35. It is also not known that how the learned CIT–A came to know about the different email ids on which notices were sent. Before us, the assessee has denied that these email ids belong to the assessee. Unfortunate incident was also reported that the chartered accountant of the assessee passed away on 21/8/2024 and the appellate order was passed on 25/9/2024, due to this even otherwise, non-compliance is for a sufficient cause. On appreciation of the above facts, it is apparent that assessee has failed to get a proper hearing before the lower authorities. Even otherwise the learned CIT–A has also not decided the issue on the merits of the case but has merely uphold the order of the learned AO without giving his own reasoning.
