PRAVINKUMAR RAMNIWAS GUPTA,MUMBAI vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), NATIONAL FACELESS APPEAL CENTRE (NFAC)

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1331/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai01 July 2024AY 2010-2011Bench: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA (Accountant Member), SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY (Judicial Member)2 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that despite four notices being issued by the CIT(A), they were sent to an incorrect email address. The Tribunal restored the issues back to the file of the CIT(A) with a direction to serve notice on the correct email address, thereby affording the assessee an opportunity of being heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Pravinkumar Ramniwas Gupta, appealed against an order from the National Faceless Appeal Centre for A.Y. 2010-11, where the CIT(A) confirmed an addition. The assessee's primary grievance was that the CIT(A) failed to serve a proper notice before confirming the addition.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) order confirming an addition was valid given that notices were sent to an incorrect email address, denying the assessee a proper 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, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY

For Appellant: Shri Viraj Mehta
For Respondent: Shri Himanshu Sharma, CIT- DR

This appeal by the assessee is preferred against the order dated 24/01/2024 by National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi pertaining to A.Y.2010-11.

2.

The sum and substance of the grievance of the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition by not serving a proper notice to the assessee.

Pravin Kumar Romniwas Gupta. ITA no.1331/Mum/2024

3.

Representatives were heard at length case records carefully persued, we find that though the learned CIT(A) issued notice four (4) times but as per the screenshot of the service of notice through email, we find that the notices have been sent on wrong email address. Before us, the counsel assured that the assessee has updated his email address, therefore, we restore the issues to the file of learned CIT(A) with a direction to serve notice on the correct email address affording an opporuntiy of being heard to the assessee.

4.

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 01/07/2024

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →