Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee sold immovable property and declared income. The case was reopened u/s 147, and an addition of Rs.48,75,000 was made on account of short-term capital gain. The assessee failed to appear before the CIT(A)/NFAC, leading to the dismissal of the appeal for want of prosecution. The assessee claimed that notices were sent to incorrect email addresses during the Covid period, causing non-compliance.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. Considering the ex-parte nature of the orders passed by the AO and CIT(A)/NFAC due to non-compliance with notices sent to incorrect email addresses, the Tribunal set aside the appellate order and remanded the matter back to the Assessing Officer for fresh adjudication after providing a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
Key Issues
Whether the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) for want of prosecution was justified, given the assessee's claim of non-receipt of notices due to incorrect email addresses during the Covid period.
Sections Cited
147, 144, 148, 142(1), 143(3), 144B, 2(14)
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, PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE
Before: SHRI MANISH BORAD & SHRI VINAY BHAMORE
Assessment Year : 2014-15 Bharati Nimba Patil, Vs. ITO, NFAC, Delhi. S. No.235, P. No.53, 54, Shri Datta Krupa Kalanagar Mhasarul, Behind Aakash Petrol Pump, Nashik- 422004. PAN : AKAPP7755P Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Sanket M. Joshi (Virtual) Revenue by : Shri Bharat Andhale (Virtual) Date of hearing : 02.12.2025 Date of pronouncement : 15.12.2025 आदेश / ORDER
PER VINAY BHAMORE, JM:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 27.09.2024 passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC for the assessment year 2014-15.
The appellant has raised the following grounds of appeal :- “1] The learned CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal in limine and thereby confirming the addition of Rs.48,75,000 made by the A.O. in the ex-parte asst. order u/s 144 r.ws. 147 passed during Covid Period, by taxing the entire consideration received on sale of agricultural land as STCG without verifying the contention raised in Form 35 that the impugned land was rural agricultural 2(14) of the Act. 2] The assessee submits that the addition of Rs.48,75,000 made in the ex-parte asst. order u/s 144 r.w.s. 147 is apparently unjustified for reasons explained in Statement of Facts filed before CIT(A) and the said addition was made only due to non compliance to notices issued by the A.O. during covid period and hence, in the interest of justice, it is prayed that the matter may please be set aside to the file of the A.O. for fresh adjudication after granting one more opportunity of being heard. 3] The assessee submits that there was a reasonable cause due to which the notices issued by the CIT(A) could not be complied with in as much as both the notices of hearing dated 22.08.2024 and 09.09.2024 were issued in quick on the email ids jainsuryawanshi@gmail.com & patilbharti7911@gmail.com and not on the email & id sai.bhamre001@gmail.com' registered on income tax portal which was also stated in Form No. 35 and therefore, the dismissal of appeal without issuing notice on the correct email address is bad in law. 4] Without prejudice to the above grounds, the assessee submits that the appellate order passed by CIT(A) in limine without deciding the issue on merits is not justified in view of the law laid down by Hon'ble Jurisdictional Bombay High Court in Premkumar Arjundas Luthra [(2017) 297 CTR 614] and hence, the said appeal may be restored to the file of the CIT(A) for passing a speaking order on merits afresh. 5] The appellant craves leave to add/alter/ amend any of the grounds of appeal
.”
3. There is delay in filing of the present appeal. We are satisfied with the reasons mentioned in the application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit that the applicant was prevented by sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit. After hearing Ld. DR, we condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal.
4. Facts of the case, in brief, are that the assessee is an individual and furnished her return of income on 28.11.2014 by declaring an income of Rs.5,99,210/-. The case was reopened u/s 147 of the IT Act on the basis of information that the assessee along with others have sold immovable property and received an amount of Rs.48,75,000/- as her share out of the sale proceeds. Accordingly, notices u/s 148 and 142(1) and show cause notices and draft assessment order respectively were issued to the assessee. However, the assessee did not reply to any of the above notices and consequently the Assessing Officer completed the assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 144 r.w.s. 144B of the IT Act by determining total income at Rs.54,74,210/- as against the income returned by the assessee at Rs.5,99,210/-. The above assessed income includes addition of Rs.48,75,000/- on account of short-term gain on sale of immovable property.
Being aggrieved with the above assessment order, the assessee preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. Since the assessee remained absent, Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee for want of prosecution.
6. It is the above order against which the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal.
We have heard Ld. Counsels from both the sides and perused the material available on record. In this regard, we find that Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. It is the sole prayer of the assessee that if one opportunity is provided to her, she is in a position to explain her case before the Assessing Officer instead of remanding the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC. In this regard, we find that the assessment order as well as the appellate order both were passed ex-parte i.e. in the absence of the assessee since the notices were sent on some different email ID.
Considering the totality of the facts of the case and in the interest of justice and without going into merits of the case, we deem it appropriate to set-aside the ex-parte order passed by Ld. CIT(A)/NFAC and after obtaining no objection from Ld. DR, remand the matter back to the file of the Assessing Officer to pass the assessment order afresh as per fact and law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also hereby directed to respond to the notices issued by the