GARV UDYOG,NEW DELHI vs. ITO WARD-36(5), NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5205/DEL/2019Status: DisposedITAT Delhi21 December 2023AY 2015-16Bench: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE (Vice President), SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not send notices to the assessee's email address as requested in Form 35. Therefore, the assessee was not given a proper opportunity to be heard.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed to the ITAT after the CIT(A) dismissed their appeal. The assessee claimed they were not given a fair hearing as notices were not sent to their provided email address.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was denied a fair opportunity of hearing by the CIT(A) due to improper service of notices.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCHES : H : NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA

For Respondent: Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR
Hearing: 12.12.2023Pronounced: 21.12.2023

BEFORE SHRI G.S. PANNU, HON’BLE VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Assessment Year: 2015-16 Garv Udyog, Vs ITO, H.No.178, Sector 33A, Ward-36(5), Chandigarh – 160 020. New Delhi. PAN: AAGFG0632G (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by : None Revenue by : Shri Amit Katoch, Sr. DR Date of Hearing : 12.12.2023 Date of Pronouncement : 21.12.2023 ORDER PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:

This is appeal preferred by the assessee against the order dated 20.12.2018 of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-12, New Delhi (hereinafter referred as Ld. First Appellate Authority or in short Ld. ‘FAA’) in appeal No.276/17-18 arising out of the appeal before it against the order dated 27.12.2017 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred as ‘the Act’) by ITO, Ward-36(5), New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as the Ld. AO).

2.

Heard and perused the record. At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee. The ld. DR was heard who has supported the findings of the ld. tax authorities below.

3.

On appreciation of the matter on record, it comes up that the assessee has taken up a specific grounds being grounds No.1 and 2 of not being given a fair opportunity of hearing by the ld.CIT(A) as he was not served the notices of hearing by e-mail on the e-mail address provided in Form No.35. It comes up that in the Form No.35, while providing the e-mail address, the assessee has also responded to the column for confirmation from the appellant as to notices/communications may be sent on e-mail that the notices may be sent by e-mail. The order of the ld.CIT(A) shows that notices were issued to the postal address only for which the reports were that the assessee had left the address.

4.

In the light of the aforesaid circumstances, we are inclined to allow the grounds No.1 and 2 and restore the matter on merits to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for deciding the issue after giving a fresh notice of hearing through electronic mode and also on postal address provided by the assessee in Form No.35.

5.

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →