PREM RAJ BHADANA,FARIDABAD vs. ITO WARD 2(1), FARIDABAD
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The ITAT set aside the ex-parte order of the CIT(A) due to the non-receipt of hearing notices by the assessee's representative. The matter was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision after providing the assessee with an effective opportunity of hearing. The assessee was also instructed to update their email ID for future communications.
What were the facts?
The assessee, an 83-year-old senior citizen, appealed against an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) for AY 2012-13. The assessee's Chartered Accountant, whose email ID was provided for communication, contended that no notices from the CIT(A) were received via email, a claim supported by a screenshot of email activity.
What were the issues?
Whether the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) was justified given the assessee's claim of non-receipt of hearing notices via email and the assessee's advanced age.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH, ‘F’: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI M. BALAGANESH
ORDER PER AMIT SHUKLA, JM,
The aforesaid appeal filed by the assessee is against the order dated 26.09.2023 passed by National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, for quantum of assessment passed under section 143(3) r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter ‘the Act’) for Assessment Year 2012-13.
At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that the appeal has been decided ex-parte order passed by the Ld. CIT(A) against the assessee as the assessee could not receive notice sent through e-mail. We found that in Form No.35, e-mail of Chartered Accountant who was handling the tax matter of the assessee was given along with his phone number, because the assessee was a very senior citizen aged about 83 years old and since he was not aware with all this. the e-mail ID of Chartered Accountant was given. The ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that on the dates mentioned by the learned CIT (A), the chartered accountant has not received any e-mail. In support, he has filed all the details of email received on that date in a screen shot. Thus, he submitted that notices sent by the ld. CIT(A) could not be received. Therefore, he requested, the matter should be remanded back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue raised in the grounds of appeal on merits.
The learned Departmental Representative do not have any objection if the matter is restored back to the file of the learned CIT (A).
After considering the submissions made by the learned counsel for the assessee and on perusal of the documents furnished before us alongwith affidavit of the Chartered Accountant, Mr. Vipin Ram that he has not received any notice or communication from the office of the Ld. CIT (A) on his e-mail. In support of which, screen shorts of e-mail ID of respective dates mentioning the order of the Ld. CIT(A), on which the notice of hearing has been issued, has also been raised before us. Thus, in these circumstances, we set-aside the ex-parte order passed by learned CIT(A) and remand the matter to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law after giving and effective opportunity of hearing to the assessee on the grounds which has been raised before us. The assessee is also directed to update e-mail ID so that proper communication can be given.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 04th March, 2024.
More judgments on Section 147
- ACIT Central Bilaspur, Bilaspur vs Arun Kumar Agrawal, SaktiITSSA 26/RPR/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- Vinod Agrawal, Kawardha vs Assisstant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITA 666/RPR/2026[2019-20]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2019-20
- Sar Business Tradelink Private Limited… vs Income Tax Officer, Ward - 1(2), RaipurITA 599/RPR/2026[2014-15]Status: Heard21 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Tarunaben Maganlal Bhut, Navagam vs ITO Ward 2(2)(1), RajkotITA 673/RJT/2026[2024-25]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2024-25
- Neo Incorporation, Rajkot vs DCIT Circle- 1(2), RajkotITA 471/RJT/2026[2012-2013]Status: Disposed21 Oct 2026AY 2012-2013
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Ut Corp vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026
- Sunrise Engineering vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Kalra Traders vs. Union Of INDIAUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Ms Isoft vs. The Commissioner State TaxUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
