SATBIR MEHLAWAT,DELHI vs. DCIT, CENTRAL CIRCLE-26, NEW DELHI

The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that all these appeals were disposed of by the Ld.CIT(Appeals) without giving any opportunity to the assessee. Ld. Counsel referring to Form No.35 filed before the Ld.CIT(A) submitted that the e-mail address of the assessee for service of notice was mentioned as to 2380/Del/2024 “satbirmehlawat@gmail.com”. However, the notices were apparently sent to a wrong e-mail id which was mentioned as “jalaj_singhal@yahoo.com”. Ld. Counsel also invited my attention to copy of ITR filed for the AY 2020-21 submitted that the very same e-mail id which was mentioned in Form 35 was mentioned in the ITRs filed by the assessee. Therefore, it is submitted that there was no service of notice to the assessee and the Ld.CIT(A) passed ex parte order without giving any opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Thus, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee requested that these appeals may be restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(Appeals) for fresh adjudication after providing adequate opportunity to the assessee to file explanations.

Heard rival submissions. On perusal of page 8 of the Paper Book which is the notice issued by the Ld.CIT(A) to the assessee it is observed that the notices were sent to “jalaj_singhal@yahoo.com” instead of the e-mail address mentioned by the assessee in Form No.35 as “satbirmehlawat@gmail.com”. It is also observed that the assessee has also given the correct mail address even in his return of income as well as in the Income tax portal. Therefore, I find that there is merit in the submission of the Ld. Counsel that the assessee to 2380/Del/2024 was never served with a notice giving an opportunity to furnish his explanations on the issues raised in the appeal before the Ld.CIT(A).