RAM ASHISH,SONBHADRA vs. ASSESSMENT UNIT, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT, VARANASI

ITA 161/VNS/2024Status: DisposedITAT Varanasi20 July 2026AY 2018-20195 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was filed beyond the prescribed time limit. The assessee claimed the delay was due to unawareness of notices sent to an incorrect email address and illness. The lower authorities passed ex-parte orders without providing adequate opportunity to be heard.

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Observing that the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to present their case due to technical issues with email communication, the Tribunal set aside the impugned order.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard due to incorrect email communication and technical issues, and whether additions made under Section 69A were justified.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 69A,Section 115BE,Section 147,Section 144,Section 144B,Section 250,Section 271AAC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, VARANASI CIRCUIT BENCH, VARANASI

Before: SHRI KUL BHARAT & SHRI ANADEE NATH MISSHRA

For Appellant: Shri Mayank Arora, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Sudipta Paul, Sr. DR

PER KUL BHARAT, VICE PRESIDENT.:

The present appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi dated 25.04.2024, pertaining to the assessment year 2018-19. The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: -

“1. Because the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), has erred to pass Ex-parte Appellate order without considering the facts and circumstances of the case and has simply confirmed the order passed by the Ld. Assessing Authority.

2.

Because the appellant was not given proper opportunity of being heard since there was no online service of notices through emails. The appellant was

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

More judgments on Section 69A

All 15,187 judgments and leading authorities on Section 69A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →