MR. SHAM BASHEER, vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -3,

The present writ petition has been filed by the petitioner who is an assessee under the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Against the assessment orders for the assessment years 2011-12 to 2014-15, the petitioner had filed appeals. The said appeals have been disposed of vide Exhibit P-2 series of orders.

The only ground which has been taken in the writ petition is that the petitioner was not afforded an opportunity of hearing and no communication for hearing was sent to the petitioner by the appellate authority before passing the impugned Exhibit P-2 series orders on petitioner’s appeals against the assessment orders in Exhibit P-1 series. In response to the notice issued and directions passed by this Court in Orders dated 26.11.2023 and 30.11.2023, a statement has been filed on behalf of the respondents. According to the statement, petitioner has given as many as five e-mail ids as mentioned in paragraph 2 of the statement, which is extracted hereunder for perusal;

The following Email ids have been provided by the appellant at various stages (filing of returns, filing of appeals etc.) before the department and have been registered with the department. The details of such are given as under; 1 Primary Email id as per e-filing

It is further stated that the latest e-mail id given by the petitioner at the time of filing of appeal against the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 is ‘middleeast132@gmail.com’. The petitioner has been issued notices of hearing on the latest e-mail id as well as another e-mail id i.e. shamafcetm

Ms. Latha K., learned Counsel for the petitioner however submits that in the returns the petitioner had given the e-mail id ‘jayson@sajuandco.com’ and no communication has been sent on the said e-mail id to the petitioner. The e-mail id ‘middleeast132@gmail.com’ is only given in the appeal filed against the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 and that appeal is still pending for consideration.

I have considered the submissions. It is not in dispute the all these e-mail ids which are mentioned in paragraph 2 of the statement have been given by the petitioner. The latest e-mail id given by the WP(C) NO. 38347 OF 2023 6 petitioner in the appeal filed against the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 ‘middleeast132@gmail.com’ on which the notices have been sent which is evident from paragraph 3 wrongly numbered as 2 in the statement. The petitioner had received the communications in respect of the appeal against the assessment order for the assessment year 2017-18 on the e-mail ‘middleeast132@gmail.com’ and petitioner has also submitted response to the communication sent by the Department. Therefore, I am of the view that when the petitioner himself has given multiple e-mail ids and petitioner has responded to the notice issued on e-mail id ‘middleeast132@gmail.com’ on which the several communications for hearing of the appeal were issued, I find the stand of the petitioner not tenable and, therefore, the writ petition is dismissed. However, if the petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned appellate orders in Exhibit P-2 series, the petitioner may file appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, if he so advised. DINESH KUMAR SINGH JUDGE Svn