Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the NFAC. The assessee contended that he did not receive proper opportunity to present his case as notices were sent via email, despite his specific request for communication not to be through email, and he is not tech-savvy.
Held
The Tribunal held that the appellate order suffered from procedural irregularities as the assessee was not given a fair opportunity to be heard, violating principles of natural justice. The appeal was allowed for statistical purposes, and the matter was restored to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication.
Key Issues
Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity to present his case before the CIT(A) due to procedural lapses in communication, thereby vitiating the ex-parte order.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: BANGALORE
Before: SHRI WASEEM AHMED & SHRI PRAKASH CHAND YADAV
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order passed by the NFAC, Delhi dated 12/11/2024 vide DIN No. ITBA/NFAC/S/250/2024-25/1070294092(1) for the assessment year 2018-19.
In the present case, the main contention raised by the assessee is that he was not given a proper opportunity to present his case during the appellate proceedings before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee’s learned counsel submitted that the assessee is not tech-savvy and was unaware of the notices sent to his email. Due to this, he could not respond to the notices issued by the ld. CIT(A), leading to an ex-parte order being passed against him.
It was further pointed out that, in Form 35, the assessee had clearly stated that communication should not be made through email. However, despite this specific request, all notices and hearing details were exclusively sent via email. This procedural lapse raises concerns about whether the assessee was given a fair chance to represent his case. Natural justice demands that every taxpayer should be afforded a reasonable opportunity to be heard, which, in this case, appears to have been denied. The failure to comply with this fundamental principle vitiates the appellate order.
The Departmental Representative opposed the contention of the assessee, stating that the assessee had been negligent in pursuing the income tax proceedings, as he had also failed to appear during the assessment proceedings. Therefore, it was argued that a cost should be imposed on the assessee for his non-compliance.
However, the learned Authorised Representative submitted that the assessee is an elderly individual who has been facing financial distress and business losses since 2016. Additionally, he has been affected by family disputes, which further impacted his ability to comply with tax proceedings. The learned counsel assured that the assessee is now fully prepared to comply with the proceedings before the Assessing Officer (AO) and present all necessary documents to support his case.
We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and carefully considered the submissions made by both parties, it is evident that the appellate order suffers from procedural irregularities. The ld. CIT(A) proceeded to decide the appeal ex-parte which is a concern regarding the fairness of the proceedings. Given that tax matters have significant financial and legal implications, it is essential that proceedings be conducted in a manner that ensures a fair opportunity to present one’s case. Furthermore, the assessee’s age, financial difficulties, and family issues add weight to his claim that he was unable to comply with the email notices.
6. However, it is true that the assessee has not appeared during the assessment proceedings too. Accordingly, if we set aside the issue to the file of the learned CIT-A, for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law, the learned CIT-A has to call for the remand report from the AO. Therefore, in the fitness of the justice, we are inclined to set aside the issue to the file of the AO for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law so as to avoid the multiple proceedings. Moreover, the act of filing the appeal by the assessee and appearance of counsel on his behalf clearly indicates the seriousness of the assessee in pursuing the matter hence forth. Thus, in the interest of justice and to provide the assessee with a fair opportunity to present his case, the order of the ld. CIT(A) is set aside. The matter is restored to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication, after affording the assessee a reasonable opportunity to be heard. The assessee is also directed to fully cooperate with the AO and ensure timely compliance with the proceedings. The AO shall conduct the proceedings afresh, considering all relevant submissions and . evidence placed before him, and pass an order in accordance with the law.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.