BABITA AGARWAL,JAIPUR vs. ITO WARD-4(3), JAIPUR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 585/JPR/2025Status: DisposedITAT Jaipur19 May 2026AY 2012-134 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the interests of justice would be served by giving the assessee an opportunity to present her case. The impugned order was set aside, and the matter was restored to the Ld. CIT(A) for a fresh decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee's appeal was against an ex parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). The assessee, a lady not conversant with online proceedings, claimed no physical notice was sent and email communication to her consultant was not brought to her knowledge.

What were the issues?

Whether the Ld. CIT(A) order was bad in law due to lack of proper notice and opportunity to the assessee. Whether the assessment proceedings under Section 147 were valid.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250,Section 147,Section 148,Section 144

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR

Before: SHRI SANJAY GARG

For Appellant: Adv. (Thr
Hearing: 18.03.2026Pronounced: 19.05.2026

P a g e | 1 ITA No.585/JPR/2025 Babita Agarwal IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, “SMC” BENCH, JAIPUR BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.585/JPR/2025 (Assessment Year:2012-13) Babita Agarwal Vs. Income Tax Officer, E-89, Kedia Palace Ward 4(3), Jaipur Murlipura Scheme Jaipur 302023 �थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./PAN/GIR No:ADNPA3428N Appellant .. Respondent

Appellant by : Sh. Deepak Sharma, Adv. (Thr. V.C) Respondent by : Sh. Gaurav Awasthi, JCIT

Date of Hearing 18.03.2026 Date of Pronouncement 19.05.2026 O R D E R The present appeal has been preferred by assessee against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC)/Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (hereinafter referred to as “Ld. CIT(A)”) dated 14.02.2025, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short “the Act”).

2.

The assessee has taken following grounds of appeal:-

P a g e | 2 ITA No.585/JPR/2025 Babita Agarwal 1. The impugned addition made in the order u/s 147/144 dated 12.12.2019 is bad in law and on facts of the case, for want of jurisdiction and various other reasons and hence the same is kindly be deleted. 2. The very action taken u/s 147 r/w 148 is bad in law without jurisdiction and being void ab-initio, the same kindly be quashed. Consequently the impugned assessment framed u/s 147/144 dated 12.12.2019 also kindly be quashed. 3. Rs.10,08,360/-: The ld. CIT(A) erred in law as well as on the facts of the case in confirming the addition made by the AO of Rs.10,08,360/- on account of bogus purchases. The addition so made by the ld. AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A), is totally contrary to the provisions of law and facts on the record and hence the same kindly be deleted in full. 4. The appellant prays your honour indulgences to add, amend or alter of or any of the grounds of the appeal on or before the date of hearing.

3.

At the outset, the learned counsel for the assessee invited my attention to the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) to submit that the same is an ex parte order. The Ld. Counsel has further invited my attention to relevant columns in Appeal-Form No.35, wherein in the relevant column- asking the assessee “Whether notices/communication may be sent on e-mail?”, the assessee has answered as “No”.

4.

The ld. Counsel has further submitted that the assessee is a lady and is not conversant with the online income-tax proceedings. No notice in physical form was sent by the Ld. CIT(A) to the assessee. The email, if any, communicated on the address of the tax consultant was not brought to the knowledge of the assessee. Therefore, the case of the assessee remained unrepresented before the Ld. CIT(A).The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, therefore, has submitted that the assessee may be given an opportunity to present her case before the Ld. CIT(A).

P a g e | 3 ITA No.585/JPR/2025 Babita Agarwal

5.

Considering the rival submissions, I am of the view that the interests of justice will be well served if the assessee is given an opportunity to present her case before the Ld. CIT(A). In view of the above, the impugned order of Ld. CIT(A) is set aside and the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for decision afresh. The assessee will furnish the correct address/email ID to the Ld. CIT(A) within 30 days of the receipt of copy of this order and thereafter the Ld. CIT(A) will serve the notice of hearing on such address/email of the assessee. The assessee will remain vigilant and will promptly reply to the notices, if any, issued by the ld. CIT(A). It shall not be a valid ground for the assessee to claim that a notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A) did not come to her knowledge.

6.

With the above observation, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Order is pronounced under provision of Rule 34 of ITAT Rules, 1963 on 19/05/2026.

Sd/- (Sanjay Garg) Judicial Member Dated 19.05.2026 Mittali, Sr. PS

P a g e | 4 ITA No.585/JPR/2025 Babita Agarwal Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT By Order,

Asst. Registrar ITAT, Jaipur

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →