JAI PRAKASH SINGHANIA ( HUF ),RANCHI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX , CIRCLE - 1, RANCHI, RANCHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 261/RAN/2025Status: DisposedITAT Ranchi10 October 2025AY 2017-18Bench: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN (Judicial Member), SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY (Accountant Member)2 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal rejected the adjournment application due to lack of details for the authorized representative. However, acknowledging the assessee's claim regarding incorrect email service, it partly allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, restoring the case to the CIT(A) for readjudication with directions to send notices to the correct email address and ensure a proper hearing.

What were the facts?

Jai Prakash Singhania (HUF) appealed an order from the CIT(A), NFAC for AY 2017-18. During the first hearing, the assessee requested an adjournment citing the Karta's ill health and claiming the department used an incorrect email ID for previous notices, despite the correct one being provided in Form-35 and the IT portal profile.

What were the issues?

1. Whether an adjournment application without proper representation details can be granted. 2. Whether notices issued by the department to an incorrect email ID constitute valid service, warranting a remand for readjudication.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, RANCHI BENCH, RANCHI

Before: SHRI GEORGE MATHAN & SHRI RATNESH NANDAN SAHAY

For Respondent: Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR
Hearing: 10/10/2025Pronounced: 10/10/2025

Assessee represented by None, adjournment application filed. Department represented by Shri Khubchand T. Pandya, Sr.DR Date of hearing 10/10/2025 Date of pronouncement 10/10/2025 O R D E R PER: BENCH 1. This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi in appeal No. CIT(A), Ranchi/10553/2019-20 dated 25/03/2025 for the A.Y. 2017-18.

2.

None represented on behalf of the assessee. However, an adjournment application has been filed, which reads as follows: "With due respect I beg to submit that the date of hearing of the aforementioned case has been fixed on 10th October, 2025. This is the first hearing of the case. The Karta of the HUF is not well so, I request your honour to kindly adjourn the case and grant a new date. There is non-compliances before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in this case because the email id in which all the notices were sent does not belong to assessee. The email Id is available in profile section of Income Tax Portal and also it is filled while filing Form - 35. It is requested to your honour to adjourn the hearing and grant a new date.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →