Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal arose from an order by the CIT(A) for AY 2017-18. The assessee failed to respond to notices from the AO and CIT(A), citing inadvertent oversight of emails. The assessee was a well-educated individual but failed to provide acceptable reasons for non-compliance.
Held
The Tribunal noted the assessee's failure to respond to notices from both the AO and CIT(A), which was considered an unacceptable approach. However, due to the need to verify issues based on documents, the appeal was remitted back to the AO.
Key Issues
Whether the appeal should be remitted to the AO for reconsideration of evidence, despite the assessee's failure to respond to notices and the casual approach taken.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SMT. BEENA PILLAI
Per: Smt. Beena Pillai, J.M.: The present appeal filed by the assessee arises out of order dated 25/02/2025 passed by CIT(A)-2, Ahmedabad for assessment year 2017-18.
At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that, the impugned order is passed without considering the submissions of the assessee. It is submitted that, the assessee inadvertently did not take into consideration notices issued by the first appellate authority which was sent to the email Id of the assessee. He thus prayed A.Y. 2017-18 Madhu Ghanshyam Jagasia for the appeal to be remanded for consideration based on the evidences filed by the assessee. 2.1 On the contrary, the Ld.DR vehemently opposed the submission of the Ld.AR. He submitted that, even before the assessing officer the assessee did not represent its case upon notice issued on various dates. It is submitted that, non compliance of notices by the Ld. CIT(A) cannot be treated with casual approach. The Ld.DR supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal.
I have perused the submissions advance by both sides in the light of record placed before us.
Admittedly, the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the assessing officer as well as by the Ld.CIT(A). Upon inquiry with the Ld.AR it is noted that, the assessee is well educated person though now she is retired from her employment. However, the reasons for not able to appear before the authorities is not acceptable. The email Id of the assessee mentioned in form 35 is also the email as per Income tax portal. Assuming that the assessee is not very much vigilant to check the email, it is impossible that the assessee would have missed out messages sent by the department on the registered mobile number. The careless and the irresponsible approach by the assessee cannot be accepted. 3.1 However, considering the fact that the issue needs to be verified based on the documents/evidences filed by the assessee, in the interest of justice I am inclined to remit this appeal to the Ld.AO subject to payment of cost of Rs. 10,000/- by the assessee A.Y. 2017-18 Madhu Ghanshyam Jagasia to Prime Minister Relief Fund. The assessee is directed to furnish affidavit of payment having made with the acknowledgment of receipt before the Ld.AO. The assessee is also directed to respond to the notice issued by the department, failing which the assessing officer is free to consider the issues in accordance with law. The assessing officer is directed to give fair opportunity of being heard to the assessee in accordance with law. I thus remit this issue back to the Ld.AO denovo in accordance with law. Accordingly the grounds raised by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. In the result the appeal filed by the assessee stands partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 20/08/2025