Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee filed an appeal against an ex-parte order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2017-18. The assessee contended that notices issued by the CIT(A) on three different dates were not properly served, leading to the ex-parte order.
Held
The Tribunal observed that the impugned order did not confirm that the notices issued by the CIT(A) were actually served on the assessee or specify the mode of service. Consequently, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the CIT(A) for a de novo adjudication, instructing that the assessee be given a reasonable opportunity to present submissions. The assessee was also directed to respond to notices served by the CIT(A) without fail.
Key Issues
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was valid, given that the service of notices to the assessee could not be established.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “SMC”, DELHI
(A.Y.2017-18) Anil Wadhwa, 07053, ATS Greens Paradiso, Sector CHI-04, Greather Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201312 ...... अपीलाथ�/Appellant PAN: AAAPW-5091-P बनाम Vs. Assessing Officer, Ward No. 5(1)(1), Block-A, Tulsi Marg ..... �ितवादी/Respondent Sector-24, Noida, Uttar Pradesh 201307 अपीलाथ� �ारा/ Appellant by : S/Shri M.P Rastogi & Shivam Malik, Advocate �ितवादी�ारा/Respondent by : Shri Rajesh Tiwari, Sr. DR सुनवाई क� ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 11/12/2024 घोषणा क� ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : : 11/12/2024 आदेश/ORDER
PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM:
This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (hereinafter referred to as 'the CIT(A)') dated 20.06.2024, for assessment year 2017-18.
Both sides heard. The assessee is in appeal against an ex-parte order of the CIT(A). A perusal of the impugned order reveals that the CIT(A) had issued notices to the assessee on three occasions i.e. 29.01.2021, 31.05.2024 and 10.06.2024. However, it is not emanating from the impugned order that notices sent by the (AY 2017-18) CIT(A) were ever served on the assessee and the mode of service of notice to the assessee.
Taking into consideration facts of the case, I deem it appropriate to restore this appeal back to the CIT(A) for denovo adjudication after affording reasonable opportunity of making submissions to the assessee, in accordance with law.
The assessee is directed to respond to the notice(s) served by the CIT(A), without fail.