Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee deposited cash of Rs. 17,03,500/- in his saving bank account and did not file a return of income. The Assessing Officer reopened the case under Section 147 and made additions under Section 69A and for unrecorded interest income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal ex-parte without proper service of notice.
Held
The Tribunal held that notices were sent to an incorrect email ID, preventing the assessee from appearing before the CIT(A). Consequently, the appeal was dismissed ex-parte, violating principles of natural justice. The case was remanded to the CIT(A) for proper adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without proper service of notice and affording an opportunity of hearing, thereby violating principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
143(3), 147, 69A, 148
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: MS. SUCHITRA KAMBLE
O R D E R The appeal filed by the assessee is against the order passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), (in short “Ld. CIT(A)”), National Faceless Appeal Centre (in short “NFAC”), Delhi on 22.07.2025 for A.Y. 2012- 13.
The grounds of appeal raised by the assessee are as under:
1. 1. 1. “1. The learned CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without effecting proper and valid service of notice upon the appellant. The appellate proceedings were concluded without ensuring that notice was actually delivered to the appellant at his correct communication address.
The learned CIT(A) issued all hearing notices to the incorrect and unverified email ID "jaydevmali@rediffmail.com", which has no connection with the appellant, instead of the appellant's correct email ID "anilamin4545@yahoo.com", as clearly mentioned in Form 35. Issuing notices to an irrelevant email ID is equivalent to no service in law and resulted in complete denial of an opportunity of hearing, thereby violating the principles of natural justice.
The impugned appellate order is invalid and bad in law, having been passed without proper service of notice and without fulfilling the jurisdictional requirement of valid communication. In the absence of legally sustainable service, the entire ex-parte order stands vitiated and is liable to be quashed.
The learned CIT(A) mechanically affirmed the assessment order without granting any effective opportunity of hearing and without examining the factual and legal submissions that Anilkumar Ramanbhai Amin vs. ITO Asst.Year–2012-13 - 2 - ought to have been considered. The absence of independent application of mind makes the confirmation of additions arbitrary and untenable.
The learned CIT(A) passed a cryptic and summary order without addressing any factual or legal issues raised in the appeal. Considering the complete failure of the first appellate authority to discharge statutory obligations, the appellant prays that the impugned order be quashed and the additions be deleted on merits, without remand, as remand would unnecessarily prolong litigation and cause undue hardship, especially when all relevant material is already available on record.
The appellant reserves the right to add, amend, alter, or withdraw any ground of appeal at the time of hearing.”
The brief facts of the case are that as per information available the asessee had deposited cash of Rs. 17,03,500/- in his Saving Bank Account. The assessee had not filed return of income. The case of the assessee was reopened by issue of notice under Section 148 of the Act. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Act dated 11.12.2019 making of Rs. 43,17,619/- under Section 69A of the aCt and Rs. 3,440/- on account of unrecorded interest income.
Being aggrieved by the assessment order the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A), the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
There is a delay of 66 days for which the assessee has filed the delay condonation application and the reason given therein appears to be genuine. Hence, the delay is condoned.
Being aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal.
The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) dismissing the appeal without ensuring any notice to the assessee. The Ld. AR submitted that the CIT(A) send notices to the wrong email id and the CIT(A) affirmed the assessment order Anilkumar Ramanbhai Amin vs. ITO Asst.Year–2012-13 - 3 - without granting any effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee and without examining the factual and legal submission of the assessee.
The Ld. DR relied upon the assessment order and the order of the CIT(A).
Heard both the parties and perused all the relevant materials available on record.
After going through the record I find that the notice was sent to the incorrect email id, therefore, the assessee could not appear before the CIT(A). Consequently, the appeal of the assessee was dismissed by the CIT(A) on the basis of material available on record as ex-parte. Therefore, it will be appropriate to remand back this issue to the file of the CIT(A) for proper adjudication of the issues after verifying the details filed by the assessee. Needless to say the assessee be given opportunity of hearing by following principles of natural justice.
In result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. This Order pronounced in Open Court on 09/04/2026