Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee, a co-operative society, filed an appeal against an ex-parte order by the CIT(A) which was dismissed on grounds of limitation/non-compliance. The assessee contended that notices were sent to incorrect email IDs not monitored by them, leading to a lack of awareness of the proceedings and the order. The delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal was stated to be due to bona fide and unavoidable reasons.
Held
The Tribunal found that notices were not effectively served on the correct email ID provided by the assessee in Form No. 35. Consequently, the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was deemed without effective service of notice. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s order and restored the matter for fresh adjudication on merits, ensuring proper opportunity and service of notices.
Key Issues
Whether the CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal ex-parte due to improper service of notice on the correct email ID; and whether the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal should be condoned.
Sections Cited
Section 250, Section 80P(2)(d), Section 270A(1), Section 210, Section 234A, Section 234B, Section 234C
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-SHRI SIDDHARTHA NAUTIYAL
PER DR. B.R.R. KUMAR, VICE-PRESIDENT:- Delay Condoned.
This appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 12.01.2024 passed by the Ld. Addl/JCIT(A)-4, Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)” for short), under Section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act” for short) for Assessment Year 2017-18.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
“01. That the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has erred both in law and on facts while dismissed the appeal on grounds of limitation and hence it is against the principal of natural justice and appeal of the appellant may please be decide on merits.
2. That the Ld. CIT(A), NFAC has sent notices on E-mail id other than mentioned in Form no. 35, and hence the appeal dismissed on limitation is against the Principal of Natural Justice. 03. That the appellant is eligible to claim deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Income Tax Act 1961, however the A.O has disallowed claim of the appellant U/s 80P(2)(d) on various income received from the co-op society which is against the provision of law and therefore considering the facts of the case deduction u/s 80P(2)(d) of the Act for Rs. 13,77,823/- may please be allowed. 04. That the appellant has not made any fault as mentioned in section 270A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and as such the penalty proceedings may please be quashed. 05. That the appellant has neither committed default of Sec. 210 nor made any default in payment of advance tax and therefore unwanted interest charged u/s 234A 234B and 234C requires to be deleted.”
The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a co-operative society registered under the Gujarat Co-operative Societies Act, 1961. The day-to-day accounting, taxation and statutory compliances of the assessee- society were handled for more than 25 years by its then Secretary, Shri Jashubhai Chaturbhai Patel, who retired on 09.05.2023, owing to deteriorating health. It was submitted that Shri Jashubhai Patel, aged about 70 years, was not techno-savvy and was unable to operate email facilities. Therefore, while filing appeal before the Ld. CIT(A), the email ID of the Chartered Accountant, Shri Jaimin Bharatbhai Shah (jaimin_shah2000@yahoo.com), was specifically mentioned in Form No. 35 for the purpose of electronic communication. Consequently, the assessee remained unaware of the proceedings as well as the other order passed by the Ld. CIT(A). However, the NFAC issued notices and also passed the impugned ex-parte order dated 12.01.2024 by sending communications to the email IDs: jindvaseva1971@gmail.com and pateljashubhai1971 The Jindva Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd Vs ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 3– @gmail.com, which were neither operated nor monitored by the assessee society. Consequently, the assessee remained unaware of the proceedings as well as the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A).
The assessee came to know about the impugned order only on 26.02.2025, while examining records in connection with proceedings for A.Y. 2015-16. Immediately thereafter, necessary steps were taken to file the present appeal before the Tribunal.
The Ld. AR before us submitted that the delay was due to bona fide and unavoidable reasons beyond the control of the assessee and there was no mala fide intention. Reliance was placed on several judicial precedents in support of this contention.
The Ld. DR, on the other hand, relied upon the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that sufficient opportunities were granted to the assessee and there was consistent non-compliance.
We have carefully considered the rival submissions and perused the material on record. It is an undisputed fact that the appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was dismissed ex-parte primarily due to non-compliance. From the records and submissions, it is evident that the notices issued by the NFAC were not served on the email ID mentioned in Form No. 35. The assessee has explained that the email IDs used by the Department were not accessible to the Society and were not being monitored by it. Therefore, in our considered view, the impugned order has been passed without effective service of notice on the correct email ID furnished by the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, we deem it appropriate to set aside the The Jindva Seva Sahakari Mandli Ltd Vs ITO Asst. Year : 2017-18 - 4– order of the Ld. CIT(A) and restore the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) for adjudication afresh on merits, after providing due and proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee and after ensuring service of notices on the correct email ID.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
The order is pronounced in the open Court on 07.01.2026.