JATIN TRADING CO.,FARIDABAD vs. ITO, WARD 1(4), FARIDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3033/DEL/2022Status: DisposedITAT Delhi10 April 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (Accountant Member), SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S. (Judicial Member)3 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The tribunal, noting the assessee's plea of non-receipt of notices due to technical issues and the absence of objection from the Revenue, remitted the matter back to the CIT (Appeals). The CIT (A) was directed to consider the issue afresh after providing the assessee a proper opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed appeals against ex-parte orders passed by the CIT (Appeals) for two assessment years, which had confirmed the AO's orders. The assessee contended that notices from the CIT (A) were not received, either due to incorrect address/email or emails landing in the 'Junk' folder, preventing proper representation.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT (Appeals) erred in passing ex-parte orders without ensuring proper service of notices to the assessee, and whether the assessee should be granted an opportunity of being heard.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH ‘C’ : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA & SHRI YOGESH KUMAR U.S.

For Appellant: Shri Deepanshu Singla, Advocate
For Respondent: Shri Waseem Arshad, CIT DR
Hearing: 08.04.2024

PER SHAMIM YAHYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER : These appeals by the assessee are directed against the respective orders of the ld. CIT (Appeals) for the concerned assessment years. 2. Since the issues are common and connected, these are being disposed of by this common order. 3. In both the cases, pursuant to the assessment order, ld. CIT (A) in an ex- parte order had confirmed the AO’s order.

1.

2 to 2826/DEL/2022 4. Against this order, assessee is in appeal before us. We have heard both the parties and perused the records.

5.

One of the grounds taken by the assessee read as under :- “1. The ld. CIT (A), NFAC has erred on facts and in law in deciding the appeal ex-parte without serving any notice at the address provided in Form No.35 and the e-mail at which the notices were sent did not came to the notice of A/R as they were received in the ‘Junk’ folder and the notices sent on another e-mail id also did not came to the notice as it was looked after by the Accountant who has left the services of the assessee.”

6.

Referring to the above ground of appeal

, ld. Counsel for the assessee prayed that since the assessee did not receive the notices the appeal could not be pursued properly before the ld. CIT (A). He prayed that an opportunity may be given before the ld. CIT (A) to canvass the appeal.

7. Ld. DR for the Revenue did not have any objection to this proposition.

8. Upon careful consideration, we note that assessee has pleaded that assessee has not received notices from the ld. CIT (A) because of technical issues. Hence, in the interest of justice, we remit the issue to the file of ld. CIT (A). Ld. CIT (A) should consider the issue afresh after providing the assessee proper opportunity of being heard.

9. Our above order applies mutatis mutandis to both the assessment years.

10. In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on this 10th day of April, 2024.

Latest GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →