MUDIYILATHU RADHAKRISHNAKURUP RESMIKALA,CHENGANNOOR vs. ITO, WARD-2, THIRUVALLA, THIRUVALLA

ITA 724/COCH/2025Status: DisposedITAT Cochin20 November 2025AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO (Accountant Member), SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI (Judicial Member)5 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that service of notice through the ITBA portal is not a valid method under Section 282(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and Rule 127(1) of the Income-tax Rules, 1962, citing a P&H High Court judgment. Consequently, the matter was remitted back to the CIT(A) for a de novo adjudication, ensuring the appellant is provided a reasonable opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The appellant, a Homeopathy doctor, did not file an income tax return for AY 2015-16. An assessment was completed under Section 144, and penalty proceedings under Section 271(1)(c) were initiated for concealment of income. The appellant's appeal to the CIT(A) was dismissed without condoning the delay, and notices for hearing were issued via the ITBA portal.

What were the issues?

Whether service of notice through the ITBA portal constitutes valid service under the Income Tax Act and Rules, and if the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal without considering proper notice service.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 139(1),Section 144,Section 271(1)(c),Section 271(1),Section 282(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, COCHIN BENCH

Before: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, AM & SHRI MANU KUMAR GIRI, JM

For Appellant: Shri Lokanathan, CA
For Respondent: Smt. Leena Lal, Sr. D.R
Hearing: 04.11.2025Pronounced: 20.11.2025

Per: Inturi Rama Rao, AM These appeals filed by the assessee are directed against the orders of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (NFAC) dated 14th, 28th & 29th August, 2024 for Assessment Year (AY) 2015-16. 2. Since identical issues and facts are involved in these appeals, they are heard together and disposed of by this common order.

3.

For the sake of convenience and clarity the facts relevant to the appeal bearing ITA No. 722/Coch/2025 for AY 2015-16 are stated herein.

4.

Brief facts of the case are that the appellant is an individual deriving professional income as a Homeopathy doctor. The appellant had not filed return of income under the provisions of section 1

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Similar judgments

Other orders that rely on the same authority or decide the same section.

More judgments on Section 139(1)

All 8,117 judgments and leading authorities on Section 139(1) →

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →