Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2013-14 was dismissed ex-parte by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). The assessee contended that notices for hearing were sent to an incorrect email ID, different from the one provided in Form No. 35, thereby denying a fair opportunity to be heard.
Held
The Tribunal found that the notices issued by the CIT(A) were indeed sent to a wrong email ID and were consequently never served on the assessee. Therefore, the Tribunal restored the appeal to the file of the CIT(A) for de-novo adjudication, directing the CIT(A) to issue fresh notices to the correct address mentioned in Form No. 35 and ensure a reasonable opportunity of hearing.
Key Issues
Whether an ex-parte dismissal by the CIT(A) is valid when notices for hearing were sent to an incorrect email address, leading to non-service of notice and denial of fair opportunity to the assessee.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “A”, DELHI
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 [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 20.11.2023, for Assessment Year 2013-14.
Shri Goving Agarwal, appearing on behalf of assessee submitted that the CIT(A) without affording fair opportunity of hearing, in an ex-parte proceedings has dismissed the appeal of assessee. The ld. AR pointed that a perusal of notices issued by CIT(A) on different dates would show that the notices have been issued through mail on the email id sunilgoelca@gmail.com, whereas the assessee while filing appeal before the CIT(A) in Form No. 35 has mentioned email address “gupta2043@gmail.com” for service of the notices. The notices issued to the assessee by CIT(A) were never served as they were sent on wrong email id. 3. Shri Kanv Bali, representing the department submitted that the appeal can be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. 4. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The CIT(A) in an ex-parte proceedings has dismissed the appeal of assessee. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the CIT(A) had issued notice to assessee on different dates. The assessee has placed on record copy of the notices issued by the CIT(A). A close examination of said notices reveal that the notices were sent on email id other than the email mentioned by the assessee in Form No. 35 for service of notices. Thus, the notices sent by the CIT(A) were never served on the assessee. 5. Taking into consideration entire facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore this appeal back to the file of CIT(A), for de-novo adjudication. The CIT(A) shall issue notice to the assessee on the address mentioned by the assessee in Form No. 35. The assessee shall respond to the notices served upon him, without fail. The CIT(A) shall decide the appeal of assessee after allowing him reasonable opportunity to make submissions/of hearing, in accordance with law.