BALJINDER SINGH,AMBALA vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-1, AMBALA, AMBALA

PER A.D.JAIN, VICE PRESIDENT

This is assessee's appeal for assessment year 2011-12

against the order dated 28.12.2023 passed by the ld.

CIT(Appeals) NFAC, Delhi. The following grounds have been

taken :

“1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in passing an ex-parte order without affording a proper opportunity of hearing which is against the Principles of Natural Justice and as such the order passed is arbitrary and unjustified.

ITA 199/CHD/2024 A.Y.2011-12 2 2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in passing an ex-parte order dismissing the appeal in limine without discussion on merits which is against the principles of Natural Justice and as such the order passed is arbitrary and unjustified. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in rejecting the appeal ex-parte only on the basis of alleged non-compliance on part of the assessee when in fact no email/notice/SMS was received by the assessee to check the portal and as such the order passed is arbitrary and unjustified. 4. Without prejudice to the above, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has erred in upholding the addition of Rs.61,00,000/- on account of cash deposits in the bank account treating it to be alleged income from undisclosed sources which is arbitrary and unjustified. 5. That the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has further erred in upholding the addition of Rs.67,258/- on account of interest credited in the bank account which is arbitrary and unjustified.

Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for

condonation of delay explaining the reasons for the delay

occurred in filing the present application. The assessee has

stated that he provided Form No. 36 duly signed alongwith

Appeal Fee Challan to CA Aarti on 22.02.2024 for uploading

the same on the ITAT Portal on 26.02.2024. But the form

could not be uploaded on the ITAT Portal as the OTP was not

received on email. Therefore, the appeal was filed before the

ITAT on 27.02.2027. The assessee has also filed his affidavit

in this regard.

the assessee, we are satisfied that the assessee was

ITA 199/CHD/2024 A.Y.2011-12 3 prevented by sufficient cause from filing the appeal in time.

Therefore, the delay of 1 day in filing the present appeal is

condoned.

At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has 2.

invited our attention to the impugned order of the ld.CIT(A)

to submit that the ld.CIT(A) has summarily rejected the

appeal of the assessee without affording a proper

opportunity of hearing and without any discussion on merits.

It is further submitted that the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the

appeal of the assessee ex-parte only on the basis of alleged

non-compliance on the part of the assessee, but infact, no

email/notice or SMS was received by the assessee to check

the Portal.

position.

stands covered by the decision of the Hon'ble jurisdictional

High Court in the case of ‘Munjal BSU Centre of Innovation

and Entrepreneurship, Ludhiana through its authorized

signatory Shri Bharat Goyal Vs Commissioner of Income Tax

(E), Chandigarh’, in CWP 21028-2023 (O&M), wherein, vide

ITA 199/CHD/2024 A.Y.2011-12 4 order dated 04.03.2024, their Lordships have held that the

provisions of Section 282(1) of the Income Tax Act and Rule

127(1) of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, envisage that it is

essential that before any action is taken, a communication of

the notice must be in terms of these provisions; that these

provisions do not make mention of communication to be

“deemed” by placing the notice on the e-portal of the

Department; that an pragmatic view has always to be

adopted in these circumstances; that an individual or a

company is not expected to keep the e-portal of the

Department open all the times so as to have knowledge of

what the Department is supposed to be doing with regard to

the submissions of forms, etc.; and that the principles of

natural justice are inherent in the Income Tax provisions

and the same are required to be necessarily followed. 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.

ITA 199/CHD/2024 A.Y.2011-12 5

statistical purposes.

Order pronounced on 13.08.2024.

Sd/- Sd/-

(KRINWANT SAHAY) (A.D.JAIN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER VICE PRESIDENT

“Poonam” आदेश क� �ितिलिप अ�ेिषत/ Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ��यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकर आयु�/ CIT 4. िवभागीय �ितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय आिधकरण, च�डीगढ़/ DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 5. गाड� फाईल/ Guard File आदेशानुसार/ By order, सहायक पंजीकार/ Assistant Registrar