Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) due to non-participation, allegedly because no proper notice was served on the correct email ID. The assessee claims the notices were sent to an old or incorrect email address. The delay in filing the appeal with the ITAT was 170 days.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication. The Tribunal noted that the assessee had provided multiple email IDs over time and directed the assessee to be vigilant and participate in the proceedings.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte without proper notice and whether the delay in filing the appeal before the ITAT should be condoned.
Sections Cited
250, 133(6), 270A
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JAIPUR BENCH “A”, JAIPUR
Before: SHRI GAGAN GOYAL & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of NFAC, Delhi dated 29.12.2023 passed u/s. 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ‘the Act’).The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. On the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT (A) grossly erred in dismissed the appeal of assessee without considering the facts of the case and without giving the proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law also Ld. CIT (A) grossly erred in dismissing the appeal in default whereas no notice u/s. 250 was served on the assessee's registered mail id "rajeshkumawat11887@gmail.com". This mail id also mentioned in appeal form 35.
3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO grossly erred in making addition of Rs 55,57,556/- in the trading results on the basis of alleged information received from Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Limited without providing the said information to the assessee.
4. Additions made by Ld A.O. are also wrong and unlawful specifically in the circumstances where Ld A.O. has agreed that the purchases of assessee are true & verifiable.
5. Additions made are also wrong & unlawful as the Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Limited is no body to determine the profit/loss of the assessee.
6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Ld. AO grossly erred in not providing the copy of information received from the Rajasthan State Beverages Corporation Limited to the assessee.
7. On the facts and circumstances of the case Ld. AO grossly erred in making lump sum addition of Rs 4,44,655/- on account of Salary Exp., Sale Promotion Exp., Administrative Exp., Brokerage and Temporary Furnishing and Furniture.
That the appellant craves his indulgence to add, amend, alters or deletes any or all of the ground of appeal at any time before decision of appeal.”
In this matter there is a delay in filing of appeal by 170 Days and the same has been conveyed to the assessee by the registry. In response to that the assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay. The assessee submitted that communication by the office of the Ld. CIT(A) were sent on the e-mail id ved.bansal@rediffmail.com, whereas the assessee has furnished new e-mail id for the purposes of appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) through Form No. 35 as rajeshkumawat11887@gmail.com. The assessee has produced screen shots of the notices issued on e-mail id ved.bansal@rediffmail.com. Before us the assessee has submitted the e-mail id as ggcjaipur@gmail.com. This pattern confirms that the assessee is used to change the e-mail ids for communication. His e-mail id ved.bansal@rediffmail.com was there in the department’s database, certainly submitted by the assessee only, then rajeshkumawat11887@gmail.com before the Ld. CIT (A) and now a new e-mail id before us. Ultimately, the issue to be discussed here is that no notice was issued to the assessee on the email-id he furnished for the purposes of matter before Ld. CIT (A) and this resulted in an ex- parte conclusion of appeal. As there is no effective hearing took place consequentially no effective order is also there, in view of this, we deem it fit to condone the delay, as the assessee came to know about this development in the matter only after receiving communication by the previous consultant on his email-id vimalg_jpr@yahoo.co.in w.r.t. show cause notice issued u/s. 270A of the Act.
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income at Rs. 8, 74,250/- vide dated: 01.11.2017. The case of the assessee was selected for scrutinies vide notice dated: 13.08.2018. Thereafter, dates were fixed for hearing and submission of replies/evidences on 21.10.2019, 30.10.2019 and 05.11.2019, but no response was there from the assessee on designated dates. It was also observed that during the year under consideration the assessee deposited Rs. 33,90,900/- in his Punjab National Bank A/c. Ultimately, a final show cause was issued to the assessee vide dated 28.11.2019. In response to this the assessee filed his reply, extracts of the same are there in the assessment order. Ultimately, the assessment was completed after making addition of Rs. 55,57,556/- (Being difference in the results declared by the assessee and as submitted by the M/s. Rajasthan State Beverages Corp. Ltd. u/s. 133(6) of the Act). In addition to this certain disallowance were also made on account of expenses incurred by the assessee amounting to Rs. 4,44,655/-. The assessee being aggrieved with this order preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), who in turn confirmed the order of the AO as the assessee could not participate in the appeal proceedings before him, as there was no communication to him as discussed (supra).
In view of above, we deem it fit to restore the matter back to the file of the Ld. CIT (A) for fresh adjudication after giving the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard on the e-mail idggcjaipur@gmail.com and the assessee is also directed to be vigilant enough this time and participate in the proceedings before the Ld. CIT (A) without any excuse or seeking any adjournment.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 21st Day of February 2025.