SHRI RUGNATH KHODIDAS PANCHAL,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD 31(1)(1), MUMBAI
In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that issuing notices solely through the ITBA Portal was not a proper way to serve notice. Proper service should include registered email, and the appeal should have been decided on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the NFAC, Delhi, which dismissed the appeal in limine. The CIT(A) had issued notices through the ITBA Portal, which the Tribunal found not to be a proper method of service.
What were the issues?
Whether the dismissal of appeal in limine by CIT(A) on the basis of notice served through ITBA portal is proper and whether the appeal should be decided on merits.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
IT Act
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, HON’BLE & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, HON’BLE
O R D E R
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Sahoo Supply Agency,Balasore vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs,New DelhiOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S Jyoti Consultants, Agrahat vs. Pr. Commissioner GST And Central Excise Commissionerate, BhubaneswarOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Sahoo Supply Agency vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And CustomsOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- Gopal Aromatic PVT. LTD., Cuttack vs. Union Of INDIAOrissa · 3 Nov 2026
- M/S. Nourangi Paints vs. The Union Of INDIAPatna · 2 Nov 2026
