What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) erred in passing an ex-parte order due to notices being sent to the wrong email. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

The assessee's appeal was decided ex-parte by the CIT(A) because notices of hearing were sent to an incorrect email address. The correct email address was provided in Form No. 35.

What were the issues?

Whether an ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) is valid when notices were sent to an incorrect email address. The need for proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

Manoj Mishra vs ITO | s.250 | ITAT Kolkata 2024

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, KOLKATA

Before: DR. MANISH BORAD, HON’BLE & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE, HON’BLE

For Appellant: Shri Miraj D. Shah, A/R

Hearing: 30/01/2024Pronounced: 31/01/2024

PER DR. MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :

The present appeal is directed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi, [hereinafter the “ld. CIT(A)”] dt. 25/05/2023, passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) for the Assessment Year 2011-13. 2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the impugned order is ex-parte. The reason for non-appearance was that the notice of hearing was sent at a wrong e-mail address due to which the assessee was not aware about the date of hearing and, therefore, could not appear on the dates of hearing. Thus, prayer was made to restore the issue raised on merits legal grounds to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for necessary adjudication.

Assessment Year: 2011-12 Manoj Mishra On the other hand, the ld. D/R was fair enough in not opposing this request of the ld. Counsel for the assessee.

We have heard rival contentions and perused the material placed before us. On perusal of the impugned order we find that the notice of hearing dt. 29/12/2020, 13/01/2023, 15/04/2023 and 05/05/2023 have been sent at the e-mail id pkd_cha@yahoo.co.in and capradeepthakur11@gmail.com. However, as communicated by the ld. Counsel for the assessee, the e-mail id mentioned in Form No. 35 is mmsonu11@yahoo.co.in. Thus, it is apparent that the notice for hearing by NFAC has been sent on the wrong e-mail address due to which the assessee failed to appear. Under these given facts and circumstances, we direct the ld. CIT(A)/concerned officer of NFAC to adjudicate the issue raised, on merits as well as legal grounds afresh and for this purpose, notice of hearing should be sent on the correct e-mail as mentioned in Form No.

35.

The assessee is also directed to remain compliant. Needless to say that CIT(A) will give proper opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present its case.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on 31st January, 2024 at Kolkata (ANIKESH BANERJEE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Kolkata, Dated 31/01/2024 *SC SrPs Assessment Year: 2011-12 Manoj Mishra आदेश क" "ितिलिप अ"ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ" / The Appellant

""यथ" / The Respondent 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु" / Concerned Pr. CIT 4. आयकर आयु" अपील ( ) / The CIT(A)- 5. िवभागीय "ितिनिध ,आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, कोलकाता/DR,ITAT, Kolkata, 6. गाड" फाई/ Guard file.

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER,

MANOJ MISHRA,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD-31(3), KOLKATA. , KOLKATA

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments