SMT. ARUNIMA SEHGAL MUKHERJEE,CHANDIGARH vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 2(1),, CHANDIGARH.

The assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [in short ‘the CIT (A)’] dated 08.11.2024 passed for assessment year 2018-19.

The assessee has taken seven grounds of appeal. The grievance of the assessee is that ld.CIT (Appeals) has erred in upholding the ex-parte assessment order and thereby A.Y.2018-19 2 confirming the addition of Rs. 2,26,00,000/- and Rs.8,85,800/-.

With the assistance of ld. Representative, we have gone through the record carefully. We find that notices issued to the assessee were sent on incorrect e-mail, which has been demonstrated by the ld. counsel for the assessee from page Nos. 1 to 20 of his Paper Book wherein he has placed on record screenshots of the notices sent to the assessee.

The ld. DR, on the other hand submitted that assessee did not respond to the notices, therefore, AO has rightly passed an ex-parte assessment order which has been upheld by the ld.CIT (Appeals).

We have duly considered the rival contentions and gone through the record carefully. A perusal of the screenshots of the notices would reveal that these were not served upon the assessee on correct e-mail address, therefore, impugned orders are not sustainable. We set aside both the orders and relegate all the issues to the file of AO. The assessee will be at liberty to raise the objections against re-opening of assessment. The ld. AO would adjudicate the objections of the A.Y.2018-19 3 assessee against re-opening. If it is found that re-opening has been made in accordance with law, only then issues on merit be adjudicated.