CHEQUER MARKETING PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, CC-29, DELHI
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA & SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA
1 ITA Nos. 430 & 431/Del/2022 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “B”: NEW DELHI
BEFORE SHRI NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI ANUBHAV SHARMA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No. 430 /DEL/2022 [A.Y. 2011-12] & ITA No. 431 /DEL/2022 [A.Y. 2012-13]
Chequer Marketing Pvt. Ltd., Vs Asstt. Commissioner of 13/34, 4th Floor, WEA, Income-tax, Main Arya Samaj Road, Central Circle-29, Karol Bagh, New Delhi-110005. Delhi.
PAN- AACCC8709M
APPELLANT RESPONDENT
Assessee represented by Sh. Anunav Kumar, adv.
Department represented by Sh. Shankar Lal Verma, Sr. DR
Date of hearing 31.05.2023 Date of pronouncement 31.05.2023
O R D E R PER ANUBHAV SHARMA, JM:
Heard and perused the records.
At the time of hearing it transpired that on the last date of hearing on
29.05.2023, the Bench had made following observing:
2 ITA Nos. 430 & 431/Del/2022
“It appears from the impugned order that 09 opportunities have been afforded to the Assessee by issuing notices to the Assessee by the Ld. CIT(A) but the Assessee neither appeared nor filed any document/reply and therefore in the constrained circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) passed the impugned order
The Assessee by filling affidavit claimed that the Assessee initially received a notice 27-01-2020, by which the case was fixed on 13-02-2020 on which date the Assessee sought adjournment for one month and thereafter the CIT(A) though issued several notices for hearing in 2021 but the same never sent or received by the Assessee
Considering the peculiar facts specifically the claim made by the Assessee in affidavit, the ld. DR is directed to verify the facts stated in Assessee's affidavit, by perusing the Appeal Record before the Ld. CIT(A) and to file the status report alongwith copies of notices sent and received. Case is adjourned to for compliance on 31/05/2023 and for taking cognizance on affidavit filed by the Assessee. Parties informed in open Court.”
Amongst other issues on merits, the assessee has raised ground about
disposal of appeal by the learned CIT(A) without sufficient service of notice and
opportunity of hearing.
Report is submitted by the learned DR on the basis of facts reported by the
learned CIT(A), which mention that learned CIT(A) while hearing the appeal had
issued notice through ITBA Portal on registered e-mail address of the assessee
company, as mentioned by the assessee in form no. 35. The report submitted by the
learned CIT(A) indicates that for A.Y. 2011-12 notice u/s 250 of the Act was
issued on 27.01.2020 for date of hearing 13.02.2020 and for which adjournment
3 ITA Nos. 430 & 431/Del/2022 was sought by the assessee/appellant. This corroborates the averments of assessee
in the affidavit of Shri Giri Raj Goyal, aged about 82 years, who is Director of the
assessee company, wherein it is submitted that except for this notice issued by
postal means, no other notice received.
Learned AR pointed out that in form no. 35, although the e-mail address of
the assessee company was mentioned but in the column meant to indicate, if
notices/communication may be sent on email, the assessee company had preferred
to specify ‘No’. Learned AR submitted that the reason for the same was that the
Director is an old man and not acquainted with electronic communications. Thus, it
appears that may be notices were issued by the learned CIT(A) on e-mail, but the
same were not in the knowledge of assessee company as it had preferred to
mention in form no. 35 that notices be issued in physical form only.
The learned DR has submitted that it is mandatory to issue notices by e-mail,
but Bench is of view that where an option is sought from an assessee in form no.
35, as to mode of service of notice and if assessee prefers to opt for physical notice
only, then electronic notice issued cannot be considered to be due issuance and
service of the notice. Thus, the Bench is of the considered opinion that assessee
company was not given reasonable opportunity of hearing and to contest on merits.
Therefore, ground no. 2 is sustained. Issues on merit, for both assessment
years, are restored to the files of Ld. CIT(A) for giving an opportunity of hearing to
4 ITA Nos. 430 & 431/Del/2022 assessee company and decide afresh. Further, learned CIT(A) shall ensure that
notices are issued on the postal address of the assessee as provided in form no. 35. Appeals are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in open court on 31.05.2023.
Sd/- Sd/- (NARENDRA KUMAR BILLAIYA) (ANUBHAV SHARMA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER
*MP* Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, NEW DELHI
