KASHISH OVERSEAS (P) LTD,DELHI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-14(2), DELHI, DELHI

This appeal is preferred by the assessee against the order dated 27.03.2024 of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), NFAC (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. First Appellate Authority or ‘the Ld. FAA’, for short) in Appeal No.CIT(A), Delhi-5/10217/2019-20 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 16.12.2017 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by the ITO, Ward-14(2), Delhi, (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).

Heard and perused the record. The ld. AR has mentioned at the outset that there is a delay in filing the appeal before this Tribunal of 60 days. It was submitted that the assessee was not aware of the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) where also the assessee was proceeded ex parte. Considering the reasons cited about the mismatch of e-mail in issuance of notices by the ld.CIT(A), we consider it appropriate to condone the delay. Accordingly, allowing the application, the appeal is admitted for hearing.

The ld. AR has submitted that when the appeal was filed in Form 35, it was mentioned that the assessee be not served by online mode through e-mail, but, through postal mode only. This aspect is reflected in the Form No.35. Further, we find that the assessee had given e-mail cavkbco@gmail.com as e- mail address in Form No.35 which appears to be the e-mail id of the concerned AR. Further, on going through the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) we find that there is a mention in para 5 of the fact that the assessee had sought opportunity for filing written submissions and additional evidences. The impugned order mentions of the issuance of all notices. However, it is not apparent as to on which e-mail address the notices were served. The assessee has claimed that the active e-mail address was akv.aca@gmail.com.

In any case, when the assessee had mentioned that notices be not served through e-mail and there is no mention of the fact that notices were also sent simultaneously by postal mode. The assessee’s claim that the assessee was not aware of the notices issued for hearing has to be sustained.

Accordingly, we allow ground No.5 and consequently, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. The impugned order is set aside and the issue on merits as well as on law, if any, raised by the assessee are restored to the files of the ld. FAA with a direction to give a fresh notice of hearing on the correct e-mail address as well as postal address of the assessee and decide the appeal afresh.