The Delhi Bench of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) has directed re-adjudication as the notices for fixing date of hearing sent on incorrect email address.
The impugned assessment order had been passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 144 of the Income Tax Act. He noted that several opportunities were given by issuing show-cause-notices which remained not complied in absence of any corroborative evidence furnished in support of claim of the assessee, Syed Nadeem Abbas.
Assessment was completed ex pate. In the return filed by the assessee, he had claimed agricultural income. Case of the assessee was selected for limited scrutiny under CASS on the issue of “large agricultural income”. Since no documentary evidence was furnished in this respect, this was added as income from other sources. Against this, the assessee went in appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals).
The (CIT(A)) noted four different dates which were fixed for hearing and remained unattended by the assessee. He noted that notices were sent on the email id ‘caspagrwal@gmail.com mentioned’ in Form 35. Since, there was no compliance on the notices issued for the hearings and in absence of any submission from the assessee, Commissioner of IncomeTax(Appeals) disposed it on the basis of statement of facts filed in Form 35.
The (CIT(A)) presumed that the assessee was not interested in pursuing his appeal and thus did not find any reason to interfere with the order of the Assessing Officer. The appeal was, thus, dismissed.
Sachin Jain, on behalf of the assessee submitted that in the present time, conduct of appellate proceedings at the first appellate stage was in digital mode. Notices for fixing the date of hearing were sent on the email address mentioned in Form 35. In the present case, the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) took note of the email id incorrectly which resulted in non-receipt of the notices issued for fixing the date for hearing.
He further pointed to the discrepancy in the email id noted by the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals) that the correct email id was caspagarwal@gmail.com whereas in the email id taken by Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) for issuing notices was caspagrwal@gmail.com.
Anuj Garg, appeared on behalf of the revenue.
The two-member Bench of C.M. Garg, (Judicial Member) and Girish Agrawal, (Accountant Member) considering the facts on record and the discrepancy pointed out as noted above, found that it was proper to remit the matter back to the file of Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) for fresh adjudication by affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee and allowing him to make his submission in support of the claim.
Subscribe Taxscan Premium to view the JudgmentSupport our journalism by subscribing to Taxscan premium. Follow us on Telegram for quick updates
