Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee received ex-parte orders from the CIT(A) as notices were sent via email, despite the assessee opting for physical hearings. The assessee argued that they could not attend due to the mode of communication used by the CIT(A).
Held
The Tribunal remanded the matters back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to provide an opportunity for hearing and for the assessee to participate diligently.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in passing ex-parte orders without affording proper hearing to the assessee when notices were sent via email against assessee's preference for physical hearing.
Sections Cited
153C, 143(3)
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE
Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI
आदेश/ O R D E R
Per Bench:
Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 28.08.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-3, Bhopal [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 30.12.2016 passed by learned ACIT-Central (2), Indore [“AO”] u/s 153C r.w.s. 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Years [“AY”] 2008-09 to 2013-14, the Page 1 of 3
Shree Balaji Construction to 867/Ind/2024 & ITANo.869/Ind/2024 AYs: 2011-12 to 2013-14,2009-10 & 2010-11 & 2008-09 assessee has filed the captioned six (6) appeals on the grounds mentioned in respective Appeal Memos (Form No. 36).
Ld. AR for assessee submits that the CIT(A), while conducting first- appeal, has served notices of hearing on e-mail of assessee although the assessee has specifically mentioned “No” in the column provided in Form No. 35 asking “Whether notices/communication may be sent on email?”.
Therefore, the assessee demanded physical hearing from CIT(A) but against the demand of assessee, the CIT(A) issued all notices through e-mail. Hence, in absence of service through physical mode as per demand of assessee in Form No. 35, the assessee could not attend hearings fixed by CIT(A) which has led to the passing of ex-parte order by CIT(A). Ld. AR acknowledges that the assessee is ready and willing to make a proper representation before CIT(A) if an opportunity is given and prays that the present matters should be remanded to the file of CIT(A) for a proper adjudication of the grounds/issues raised by assessee in first-appeal. Ld. AR also filed a copy of recent order dated 23.06.2025 passed by ITAT, Ahmedabad in Swetank Madhuvir Patel Vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, in which the case was remanded to CIT(A) in identical circumstance.
Ld. DR for revenue agrees with the prayer of Ld. AR but makes a request to direct the assessee to represent cases before CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments.
Shree Balaji Construction to 867/Ind/2024 & ITANo.869/Ind/2024 AYs: 2011-12 to 2013-14,2009-10 & 2010-11 & 2008-09 4. In view of above submissions of parties; having regard to the principle of natural justice and also bearing in mind that no prejudice would be caused to revenue if the present matters are restored at the level of CIT(A), we remand these matters back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication afresh.
The CIT(A) shall give necessary opportunity of hearing to assessee and pass appropriate order(s) uninfluenced by his earlier order. The assessee is also directed to remain vigilant and ensure participation in the hearings as may be fixed by CIT(A) and do not seek unnecessary adjournments failing which the CIT(A) shall be at liberty to pass appropriate order(s) in accordance with law. Ordered accordingly.
Resultantly, these appeals are allowed for statistical purpose.
Order pronounced in open court on 10/10/2025