Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte. The assessee claimed to be illiterate and stated that the advocate initially handling the case did not communicate notices or file replies, leading to non-appearance. Notices issued by the AO were also allegedly not received.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the CIT(A) passed an ex-parte order despite the assessee providing an email for service. The Tribunal restored the matter to the AO for denovo assessment, providing the assessee an opportunity to make submissions.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) order passed ex-parte without proper service of notice is sustainable. Whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity for fresh assessment proceedings.
Sections Cited
144, 148, 142(1)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
(A.Y.2012-13) Satendra, S/o Suresh Chand, Near-Thana Chopla, ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant Garhmuktwshwar, Hapur, Uttar Pradesh 245101 PAN: ICQPS-8811-B बनाम Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-3(5) ..... �ितवादी/Respondent Hapur, Uttar Pradesh अपीलाथ� �ारा/Appellant by : Shri Jitin Kumar Agarwal, Advocate �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Ms. Sudha Gupta, Sr.DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 29/07/2025 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 29/07/2025 आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 05.03.2024, for Assessment Year 2012-13.
Shri Jitin Kumar Agarwal, appearing on behalf of the assessee submits that the CIT(A) in an ex-parte proceedings dismissed appeal of the assessee. The ld. Counsel submitted that the assessee is an illiterate person. While filing appeal before CIT(A), in Form No. 35 email address of advocate who was initially handling the case of assessee was given, he never communicated the notices to the assessee nor filed reply to the notices. Therefore, the assessee could not make submissions before the CIT(A). He further submitted that due to non service of (AY 2012-13) notices the assessment order was passed us/. 144 of the Income Tax Act, 1961(hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’). He prayed for an opportunity to make submissions before the Assessing Officer (AO).
Per contra, Ms. Sudha Gupta representing the department vehemently opposed the appeal and prayed for upholding the impugned order.
Both sides heard. This appeal by the assessee is against ex-parte order passed by CIT(A). A perusal of the impugned order shows that three notices were issued to the assessee i.e. on 29.01.2021, 13.02.2024 & 21.02.2024, none of the notices were responded by the assessee. The assessee in Form No. 35, Column 17 has given email address ‘ramansharmataxadvocate@gmail.com’ for service of notice. It is contended that the relation between assessee and his tax consultant had gone sour therefore the assessee’s tax consultant neither replied to the notices nor informed the same to the assessee. Even the notices issued by the AO u/s. 148, 142(1) and 144 of the Act were purportedly not received by the assessee. Considering entire facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore the matter back to the AO for denovo assessment after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
If the assessee seeks to receive notice on any other email id, the assessee may update his current communication address including email details on the portal of Income Tax Department and PAN database within 60 days from the date of receipt of the order.
The assessee shall respond to notice(s) served by the AO, without fail.
(AY 2012-13) 7. In the result, impugned order is set aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose. Order pronounced in the open court on Tuesday the 29th day of July, 2025.