RAMA RAO GUDIMELLA,WARANGAL vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, WARANGAL

The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal :

Brief facts of the case are that, the assessee had filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessment order passed by the Learned Assessing Officer (“Ld. AO”) under Section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) on 27.02.2024.

However, during the appellate proceedings, the assessee did not respond to the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A). Consequently, the Ld. CIT(A) passed an ex parte order dismissing the appeal of the assessee.

Aggrieved with the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before us. The Learned Authorised Representative (“Ld. AR”) invited our attention to Form No. 35 filed before the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee had specifically mentioned his email ID as ramarao_hitek@yahoo.com for service of notices. The Ld. AR further pointed out that the Ld. CIT(A) had instead sent the notices to a different email ID, which although belongs to the assessee, is no longer in use. It was also submitted that the assessee was unaware of the proceedings before the Ld. CIT(A) and came to know about the dismissal of the appeal only upon receipt of the demand notice from the Revenue authorities. The Ld. AR pleaded that the non-response to the notices was not intentional but due to genuine communication failure. He therefore prayed that in the interest of natural justice, the matter may be restored to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication on merits by providing one more opportunity to the assessee to present his case and submit necessary documentary evidence.

Per contra, the Learned Departmental Representative (“Ld. DR”) opposed the request for remand and supported the order of the Ld. CIT(A).

We have heard the rival submissions and also gone through the record in the light of the submissions made on either side. On perusal of Form No. 35, we note that the assessee had clearly mentioned ramarao_hitek@yahoo.com as the communication email ID for service of notices. However, from the copy of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), placed on record by the Ld. AR, it is evident that the notices were sent to a different email ID, which, though belonging to the assessee, was no longer in use. In our considered view, the assessee was deprived of the opportunity to present his case due to non-service of notice on the correct email ID. The order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) is thus in violation of the principles of natural justice. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to adjudicate the appeal afresh on merits, after providing due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. At the same time, we also direct the assessee to extend full cooperation before the Ld. CIT(A) and not seek any unnecessary adjournment. In case of failure to comply, the Ld. CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass order in accordance with law.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.