Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed belatedly by 188 days, with an affidavit explaining the delay. The key issue was that both the AO and Ld.CIT(A) passed ex-parte orders against the assessee due to non-response to notices sent to incorrect email addresses.
Held
The Tribunal held that the ex-parte orders passed by the AO and Ld.CIT(A) were in violation of natural justice, as notices were not served on the correct email ID of the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte orders passed by the lower authorities are valid when notices were sent to incorrect email addresses, violating principles of natural justice.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY & SHRI S.R.RAGHUNATHA
आदेश / O R D E R
PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:
This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/NFAC, (hereinafter referred to as ‘Ld.CIT(A)‘), Delhi, dated 30.08.2024 for the Assessment Year (hereinafter referred to as ‘AY‘) 2018-19.
At the outset, the Ld.AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the appeal has been filed belatedly by ‘188’ days and assessee has filed an affidavit explaining the cause for the delay. Having gone through the contents of the same, we find that cause for delay was reasonable, so we excuse the same and proceed to hear the assessee’s appeal on merits.
The Ld.AR of the assessee brought to our notice that the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) is an ex parte order. According to the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee didn’t respond to his notices and therefore, he passed the ex parte order against the assessee. In order to substantiate the same, the Ld.AR drew our attention to Para No.7.1 of the impugned order, wherein, the Ld.CIT(A) has noted that the assessee is before him, against the ex parte order passed by the AO and even then, he is disinterested in pursuing his appeal. Therefore, he proceeded to confirm the action of the AO by merely stating that the assessee failed to bring on record any facts or documents to explain how the order of the AO was erroneous. Before us, the Ld.AR gave the reason for non-appearance before the Ld.CIT(A)
1. as well as the AO by stating that notices were issued by both the authorities to an e-mail which the assessee has not intimated in the ITR/Form No.35. In order to buttress this fact, he drew our attention to Page Nos.70-73 of the Paper Book, from which, it is noted that the notices were sent to 15shri1970@gmail.com by the Office of the Ld.CIT(A) whereas the assessee has shown in Form No.35 as well as in the ITR, the e-mail ID as dlogaraj123@gmail.com. It is also noted that copy of the notices were sent to dlogaraj@yahoo.com which is per-se a different e-mail. In such a scenario, since the notices were sent to some other e-mail ID, the assessee can’t be faulted for not responding to either the notices issued by the Ld.CIT(A) or by the AO during the appellate proceedings or assessment proceedings. Therefore, we find that the action of the Ld.CIT(A) passing the impugned order is bad in law for violation of natural justice. It is an undisputed fact that the AO has also passed the assessment order ex parte qua assessee and the AO is also noted to have sent the notices to some other e-mail ID. Hence, there is per-se violation of natural justice. Therefore, the assessee has not been given proper opportunity of hearing before the AO who is the primary authority vested with the power to assess the income of the assessee the income of the assessee. Therefore, relying on the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of TIN Box Co. v. CIT reported in [2001] 249 ITR 216 (SC), we set aside the impugned order of the Ld.CIT(A) and restore the assessment back to the file of the AO with a direction to pass de novo assessment after hearing the assessee. Needless to say, the assessee be given proper opportunity of hearing and the notices to be sent to the e-mail ID shown in the ITR i.e. dlogaraj123@gmail.com and the assessee is expected to file all the details/relevant documents to
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 07th day of October, 2025, in Chennai.