PALAKA SATANARAYANA,KAKINADA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, KAKINADA

Facts

The assessee's income for A.Y. 2014-15 was reassessed under Section 147, and an addition of Rs. 34.50 lacs was made under Section 69A for unexplained cash deposits in bank accounts. The assessee's appeal before the CIT(A) was dismissed, with the assessee contending that they were not afforded a proper opportunity of hearing as notices were sent to an incorrect email address, different from the one provided in Form No.35 for appeal communications.

Held

The tribunal found that the assessee was not validly notified about the hearing dates by the CIT(A), as notices were sent to an email ID from the Income Tax Return (ITR) instead of the specific email provided in Form No.35 for the appeal. This constituted a denial of a reasonable opportunity of being heard. Consequently, the matter is remanded back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication after providing the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard.

Key Issues

Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal without affording a proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee, thereby denying natural justice, and the validity of the reassessment proceedings and addition of unexplained cash deposits under Section 69A.