Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed ex-parte by the CIT(A) due to non-appearance. The assessee claims non-receipt of hearing notices due to incorrect email addresses being used by the CIT(A). The assessee is represented before the ITAT and wishes to pursue the appeal on merits.
Held
The Tribunal restored the matter to the file of the CIT(A) for de novo adjudication on merits. The CIT(A) is directed to issue fresh hearing notices to the correct email address provided by the assessee and afford a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte due to non-receipt of hearing notices caused by incorrect email communication? Whether the reassessment proceedings were validly initiated?
Sections Cited
250, 143(2), 148, 68
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI VIKRAM SINGH YADAVSHRI SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL
Date of Hearing – 03/04/2025 Date of Order - 04/04/2025
O R D E R PER SANDEEP SINGH KARHAIL, J.M. The present appeal has been filed by the assessee challenging the impugned order dated 20/11/2023, passed under section 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [“learned CIT(A)”], for the assessment year 2017-18.
In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds: -
“1. That the assessment order passed by Ld. AO as well as the appellate order passed by Ld. CIT(A) are bad in law and have been passed in contravention of prevailing law as well as facts of the case. therefore liable to be annulled. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in dismissing the appeal of assessee due to non-appearance that too without adjudicating the grounds of appeal raised.
3. That the reassessment order passed is further illegal and not tenable because of completion of reassessment proceedings without issue of mandatory notice u/s 143(2) of the Act.
4. That the reassessment proceedings undertaken by Ld. AO are further illegal and not tenable under the law because no Document Identification Number (DIN) was generated for the reasons recorded on which approval was obtained for reopening of assessment proceedings u/s 148 of the Act.
5. That the reassessment proceedings initiated u/s 148 of the Act (unamended) vide issue of notice dated 31/03/2021 is illegal and non- tenable under the law because of issue of said notice on 01/04/2021.
6. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in making addition of Rs. 3.42.00.000/- under Section 68 of the Act.
7. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in assessing sale proceeds of investments as unexplained cash credits leading to double taxation of said amount.
8. That the Ld. AO grossly erred in law and in facts of the case in assessing amounts refunded during the year under consideration itself as unexplained cash credits u/s 68 of the Act.”
3. Having considered the submissions and perused the material available on record, it is evident that the learned CIT(A) has passed the order ex-parte due to the non-appearance of/on behalf of the assessee. Now, in the appeal before us, the assessee is duly represented by the learned Authorised Representative (“learned AR”) and wishes to pursue the litigation against the addition made by the AO. During the hearing, the learned AR submitted that the hearing notices were sent by the learned CIT(A) on a different email address and not the one provided by the assessee in Form no.35. The learned AR submitted that since the assessee was not aware about the notices of hearing, therefore, the hearings could not be attended before the learned CIT(A). Accordingly, the learned AR submitted that there was no willful or deliberate attempt on the part of the assessee to not comply with the notices issued by the learned CIT(A). From the perusal of the copy of hearing notices furnished by the learned AR, we find that the notices were sent to the email addresses gauri_ca@yahoo.co.in and sawankumarjajoo@yahoo.co.in, while the email address as mentioned in Form no.35 is benchmarkbuildcon@gmail.com.
4. In view of the facts and circumstances as noted above, we are of the considered opinion that in the interest of justice, the assessee be hereby granted one more opportunity to represent its case on merits before the learned CIT(A). Consequently, we deem it fit and proper to restore the matter to the file of the learned CIT(A) for de novo adjudication of the appeal on merits after consideration of all the details/submissions as may be filed by the assessee. Needless to mention, no order shall be passed without affording reasonable opportunity of hearing to the parties. During the hearing, the learned AR undertook that the hearing notice issued to the email address as mentioned in Form no.35, i.e. benchmarkbuildcon@gmail.com, shall be complied with by the assessee. Accordingly, the learned CIT(A) is directed to issue the hearing notice(s) on the aforesaid email address, unless at a subsequent stage, the assessee wishes to change its email address for the purpose of communication of hearing notice, for which the assessee is directed to intimate the learned CIT(A) in advance. Thus, the assessee is directed to appear before the learned CIT(A) on all the dates of hearing as may be fixed without any default. As the matter is being restored to the file of the learned CIT(A) for adjudication on merits, the other grievances raised by the assessee in the present appeal do not call for adjudication at this stage. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open Court on 04/04/2025