RAJESH KUMAWAT,JAIPUR vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 4(5), JAIPUR

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.

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.

Order pronounced in the open court on 21st Day of February 2025.