Notice Received via Email Despite Form No. 35 Request for Physical Service of Notice: ITAT sets aside Ex-Parte Order [Read Order]
![Notice Received via Email Despite Form No. 35 Request for Physical Service of Notice: ITAT sets aside Ex-Parte Order [Read Order] Notice Received via Email Despite Form No. 35 Request for Physical Service of Notice: ITAT sets aside Ex-Parte Order [Read Order]](https://www.taxscan.in/wp-content/uploads/2023/06/EMAIL-NOTICES-ITAT-Notice-Received-via-Email-Despite-TAXSCAN.jpg)
The Ahmedabad Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has set aside the exparte order as the notice was received via email despite the request for physical service of notice in Form No.35.
The assessee Jayshree Kamleshkumar Patel was an individual running a petrol pump. For the Assessment Year 2017-18 the assessee filed her Return of Income on 24.10.2017 declaring total income. The Return was selected for scrutiny assessment as there were huge cash deposits during the demonetization period.
The assessee was served with notices under Section 143(2) of the Income Tax Act by registered Email on various dates on four occasions. However, the assessee failed to reply to the email notices. Therefore, the assessment was completed ex-parte making addition of cash deposits in the bank account as unexplained cash under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act.
M. K. Patel, on behalf of the assessee submitted that all the hearing notices were sent by email to the assessee, however, in From No. 35 very specifically the assessee stated the notices not to be sent through email.
Thus, the assessee was not served with any physical notice of hearing, the assessee could attend the appellate proceedings before National Faceless Appeal Center [NFAC].
Rakesh Jha, on behalf of the revenue submitted that even the assessment order was an ex-parte order and the assessee had not cooperated with the Department and also not appeared before the appellate authority in spite of various opportunities given.
The two-member Bench of Waseem Ahmed, (Accountant Member) and T.R. Senthil Kumar, (Judicial Member) observed that the assessee had clearly mentioned “not to send” notices and communications by email, but the notices were sent by email and not by physically.
The Bench thus ordered to provide due opportunity to the assessee.
To Read the full text of the Order CLICK HERE
Support our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates