SURENDER SINGH CHAUHAN,GHAZIABAD vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, GHAZIABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2931/DEL/2025Status: DisposedITAT Delhi05 August 2025AY 2012-13Bench: SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY (Judicial Member)1 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that Section 250 of the Income Tax Act does not mandate dismissal for non-prosecution and the CIT(A) is obligated to pass an order on merits. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) for non-prosecution. The CIT(A) had issued multiple notices to the assessee, but it was unclear if they were sent to the correct email address. The assessee had provided an email address in Form No. 35.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) can dismiss an appeal for non-prosecution without considering the merits, and whether proper notice was served to the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI

Hearing: 31/07/2025

(A.Y. 2012-13) Surender Singh Chauhan, Village Karhera, Mohan Nagar, Ghaziabad, ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant Uttar Pradesh 2010007 PAN: ADYPC-6319-D बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Circle 2(2)(1), ..... �ितवादी/Respondent Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh 20100 अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant by : None �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 31/07/2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 31/07/2025 आदेश/ORDER

PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:

1.

This appeal by the assessee is directed against an ex-parte order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/Additional/Joint Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-2, Chandigarh (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 04.03.2025, for Assessment Year 2012-13.

2.

A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the CIT(A) had issued notices to the assessee on four occasions i.e. on 13.01.2021, 21.10.2024, 05.11,2024 & 18.02.2025. However, it is not emanating from impugned order as to on which email id the notices were being sent to the assessee. A perusal of Form No. 35 (AY 2012-13) reveals that in column no. 17, the assessee has mentioned email address fcayogeshgoyal@gmail.com for service of notice.

3. The CIT(A) has dismissed appeal for non prosecution. The provisions of section 250 of the Income Tax Act,1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) does not mandate the CIT(A) who dismissed appeal for non prosecution. The CIT(A) is under obligation passed the order on merits. [Re. CIT vs. Prem Kumar Arjundas Lathura HUF, 240 Taxman 133 (Bombay)]. I deem it appropriate to restore this appeal back to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of makings to the assessee, in accordance with law.

3.

The CIT(A) shall issue notice to the assessee on email id provided in column no. 17 of Form No. 35.

4.

The assessee shall respond to the notice(s) served by the CIT(A), without fail.

5.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Thursday the 31st day of July, 2025.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →