GARG FURNACE LIMITED,LUDHIANA vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, LUDHIANA
What did the Tribunal hold?
The tribunal held that merely uploading the date of hearing on the Income Tax Portal does not constitute effective service of notice. The ex-parte order passed by the CIT(Appeals) is not sustainable.
What were the facts?
The assessee's appeal was decided ex-parte by the CIT(Appeals) without considering the reply filed by the assessee. The CIT(Appeals) allegedly did not serve proper notice of hearing.
What were the issues?
Whether the CIT(Appeals) was justified in deciding the appeal ex-parte without proper service of notice and without considering the assessee's reply.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, CHANDIGARH
Before: SHRI A.D.JAIN & SHRI KRINWANT SAHAY
आदेश/ORDER
PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT
This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2018-19 against the order dated 17.02.2024 passed by the ld. CIT(Appeals)-5, Ludhiana. The following grounds have been taken :
1. That order passed u/s 250 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-5, Ludhiana is against law and facts on the file in as much as he was not justified to decide the appeal ex-parte.
ITA 383/CHD/2024 A.Y.2018-19 2 2. That he has gravely erred in deciding the appeal without considering the reply filed by the appellant which was uploaded on 16.02.2024 i.e. the day of hearing.
The ld. Counsel for the assessee has invited our attention to the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) to submit that the ld. CIT(A) has passed an ex-parte order qua the assessee; that the ld.CIT(A) has rejected the appeal of the assessee without giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee to present its case; that no notice of date of hearing was served by the ld.CIT(A) upon the assessee, either through physical mode or through e-mail etc.; that the ld. CIT(A) did not consider the reply dated 16.02.2024 filed by the assessee and passed the impugned ex-parte order; that the notice of date of hearing was allegedly uploaded on Income Tax Portal and no service of notice was ever affected on the assessee.
The ld. DR could not rebut the aforesaid factual position.
We have heard the rival contentions. Merely uploading of information about the date of hearing on the Income Tax Portal is not an effective service of notice as per the provisions of Section 282 of the Income Tax
ITA 383/CHD/2024 A.Y.2018-19 3 Act. The impugned order of the ld.CIT(A) is, therefore, not sustainable in the eyes of law. The same is hereby set aside with a direction to the ld.CIT(A) to decide the appeal of the assessee afresh after giving proper and adequate opportunity to the assessee to present its case.
The ld. CIT (A) will serve notice of hearing through physical mode as well as through electronic mode upon the assessee.
The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on 19.09.2024.
More judgments on Section 282
- Vimal Harilal Baldania, Gandhidham vs The ITO Ward 2, GandhidhamITA 770/RJT/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed15 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Mohd. Abrar, Bulandshahar vs ITO Ward 2(3)(2), BulandshaharITA 8343/DEL/2026[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
- Ram Chandar Jaisawal, Siddhartha Nagar vs Assessment Unit, Income Tax Department…ITA 861/LKW/2025[2019-20]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2019-20
- Kavithak, Coimbatore vs Non Coop Ward4(3), CoimbaotoreITA 2258/CHNY/2026[2020-21]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2020-21
- All Indian Ski & Hide Tanners and Merchants… vs CIT(E), ChennaiITA 2115/CHNY/2026[2027-28]Status: Disposed25 Sept 2026AY 2027-28
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- J M Mhatre Infra PVT. LTD Thr. Authorized Chetan J. Mhatre vs. Union Of INDIA Thr. Secretary And OrsBombay · 14 Oct 2026
- Namita Behera vs. Commissioner Of CT And GST, CuttackOrissa · 14 Oct 2026
- Ratul Boro vs. The Union Of INDIA And 4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Jashwant Sharma vs. The Union Of INDIA And A4 OrsGauhati · 14 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Jeyarani Shopping Centre vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer -1/The Deputy Commercial Tax OfficerMadras · 14 Oct 2026