Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a company registered under Section 8 of the Companies Act and Section 12A of the IT Act, filed a nil return claiming exemption under Section 11. The AO made an assessment under Section 143(3), which was upheld by the Ld.CIT(A) after dismissing the assessee's appeal due to non-response to hearing notices. The assessee appealed to the ITAT, contending that the notices were sent to an incorrect email address.
Held
The ITAT found that the Ld.CIT(A) had indeed sent hearing notices to an email ID different from the one registered for the assessee, justifying the assessee's non-appearance. In the interest of justice, the Tribunal granted the assessee an opportunity to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and directed the Ld.CIT(A) to issue fresh notices to the correct email ID for a decision on merits.
Key Issues
Whether the Ld.CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the assessee's appeal for non-compliance when hearing notices were sent to an incorrect email address, thereby denying a proper opportunity of being heard.
Sections Cited
11, 12A, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, VICE – & 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 06/02/2025 in respect of the A.Y. 2014-15.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a company registered u/s. 8 of the Companies Act, 2013 and also obtained registration u/s. 12A of the Act. During the year, the appellant filed their return of income and declared a Nil income after claiming the exemption u/s. 11 of the Act. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny and after considering the explanations offered by the assessee, the AO made the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act in which the total income was assessed at Rs. 2,87,26,013/-. As against the said order, the assessee filed an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) and contended that the assessment is bad in law. The Ld.CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal on the ground that the assessee had not responded to the various hearing notices sent through the registered email ID. As against the said order, the present appeal has been filed by the assessee.
At the time of hearing, the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee is having a good case on merits and also submitted that the hearing notices sent by the Ld.CIT(A) was not received by the assessee and filed a small paper book and enclosed the screenshot of the profile of the assessee as well the copy of the notices sent by the Ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the email ID of the assessee is info@sanghamithra.org whereas the notices were sent to the email ID kf.vijay@rediff.com. Therefore the Ld.AR submitted that the assessee could not be able to appear before the Ld.CIT(A) and prayed an opportunity to appear before the Ld.CIT(A).
The Ld.DR relied on the orders of the lower authorities and prayed to dismiss the appeal.
We have perused the screenshot of the profile of the assessee in which it was clearly mentioned the email ID as info@sanghamithra.org. But in the hearing notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A), the email ID has been mentioned as kf.vijay@rediff.com and the copy was also marked to bsc_company@yahoo.co.in. From the said screenshot and the copy of the notices sent, we are of the view that the Ld.CIT(A) had not communicated the hearing notices to the assessee and therefore the assessee had sufficient reasons for not appearing before him. Since the Ld.CIT(A) had not adjudicated the issue on merits, in the interest of justice, we are granting an opportunity to the assessee to appear before the Ld.CIT(A). We also direct the Ld.CIT(A) to send the hearing notices to the email ID of the assessee i.e.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 25th July, 2025.