Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee did not file his income return. Based on information of cash deposits, the AO issued notices under Section 148 and 142(1). The assessee did not respond, and the AO treated deposits as unexplained investment and interest as income from other sources.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. It was held that the Ld.CIT(A) erred by sending notices to an email ID which the assessee had specifically requested not to be used, thus denying a proper opportunity.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied a proper opportunity of being heard by the Ld.CIT(A) due to notices being sent to an incorrect email ID.
Sections Cited
148, 142(1), 69A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘SMC’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI LAXMI PRASAD SAHU & SHRI SOUNDARARAJAN K.
ORDER PER SOUNDARARAJAN K., JUDICIAL MEMBER
This is an appeal filed by the assessee challenging the order of the NFAC, Delhi dated 13/03/2024 in respect of the A.Y. 2017-18.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is an individual and not filed his return of income for the A.Y. Based on the information received by the AO about the cash deposits made into his bank account, notice u/s. 148 was issued. Thereafter, notice u/s. 142(1) was also issued. The assessee had not responded to the said notices. The AO had treated the said cash deposits as unexplained investment u/s. 69A of the Act and also treated the interest received on deposits as income from other sources. As against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). The Ld.CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal because the assessee had not responded to any of the notices.
As against the said order, the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
The appeal was filed with a delay of 229 days for which the assessee filed a delay condonation application and in the affidavit filed in support of the said delay condonation application, assessee submitted that he has not received any physical notice.He also submitted that he is an aged person and running a general provision store and has no knowledge in operating the systems. The assessee further submitted that the said delay is not intentional and prayed to condone the said delay by taking a liberal view to do substantial justice.
We have considered the said application filed by the assessee and the reasons stated therein and also considered that the delay is only 229 days, we took a lenient view and condoned the said delay in filing the appeal and proceeded to decide the appeal on merits.
At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee had not received the various hearing notices and drawn our attention to form 35 in which in the email address column, the following email ID has been mentioned i.e. hegde.naveen143@gmail.com and in the next column, it was stated that the notices / communication may not be sent to the said email ID. The Ld.AR also filed the copy of the notices sent through the e- proceedings in which the notices were sent to the email ID as mentioned in form 35 even though the assessee had requested not to send the notices to the said email ID. The Ld.AR therefore submitted that proper opportunity Ld.CIT(A) and prayed another opportunity to appear before him. The Ld.AR also filed a paper book enclosing the documents in support of the merits of the case.
The Ld.DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and prayed to dismiss the appeal.
We have heard the arguments of both sides and perused the materials available on record.
We have perused the form 35 and the copy of the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A). It is a fact that the assessee had given the email ID in Form 35 but specifically stated that no notice could be sent to the said email ID. In spite of that, the Ld.CIT(A) had issued the notices to the said email ID and therefore the assessee has no knowledge about the appeal hearings. In such circumstances, we are satisfied that the assessee is having valid reasons for not appearing before the Ld.CIT(A). We, therefore set aside the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and remit the issue to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) to decide the appeal on merits after hearing the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 30th July, 2025.