Abhishek Gupta, Ghaziabad V. ACIT, Circle 2(1)(1), Ghaziabad

ITA 1232/DEL/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5299 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 05-08-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 05-08-2024
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 18-03-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: GOVING AGARWAL; A WERE NEVER SERVED

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण िदʟी पीठ “ए”, िदʟी ŵी िवकास अव̾थी, Ɋाियक सद˟ एवं ŵी नवीन चंū, लेखाकार सद˟ के समƗ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH “A”, DELHI BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI NAVEEN CHANDRA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER आअसं.1232/िदʟी/2024 (िन.व. 2013-14) ITA No.1232/DEL/2024 (A.Y.2013-14) Abhishek Gupta, R-14/15 Raj Nagar, Ghaziabad Uttar Pradesh 201001 PAN: ASFPG-1314-G ...... अपीलाथᱮ/Appellant बनाम Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Circ le -2(1)(1), CGO Complex, Hapur Chungi, Ghaziabad, Uttar Pradesh ..... ᮧितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथŎ Ȫारा/ Appellant by : Shri Goving Agarwal, Chartered Accountant ŮितवादीȪारा/Respondent by : Shri Kanv Bali, Sr.DR सुनवाई कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of hearing : 06/08/2024 घोषणा कᳱ ितिथ/ Date of pronouncement : 06/08/2024 आदेश/ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM: This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [in short ‘the CIT(A)’] dated 20.11.2023, for Assessment Year 2013-14. 2. Shri Goving Agarwal, appearing on behalf of assessee submitted that the CIT(A) without affording fair opportunity of hearing, in an ex-parte proceedings has dismissed 2 ITA No. 1232/DEL/2024 (AY 2013-14) the appeal of assessee. The ld. AR pointed that a perusal of notices issued by CIT(A) on different dates would show that the notices have been issued through mail on the email id [e-mail], whereas the assessee while filing appeal before the CIT(A) in Form No. 35 has mentioned email address “[e-mail]” for service of the notices. The notices issued to the assessee by CIT(A) were never served as they were sent on wrong email id. 3. Shri Kanv Bali, representing the department submitted that the appeal can be restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits. 4. We have heard the submissions made by rival sides and have examined the orders of authorities below. The CIT(A) in an ex-parte proceedings has dismissed the appeal of assessee. A perusal of the impugned order shows that the CIT(A) had issued notice to assessee on different dates. The assessee has placed on record copy of the notices issued by the CIT(A). A close examination of said notices reveal that the notices were sent on email id other than the email mentioned by the assessee in Form No. 35 for service of notices. Thus, the notices sent by the CIT(A) were never served on the assessee. 5. Taking into consideration entire facts of the case, we deem it appropriate to restore this appeal back to the file of CIT(A), for de-novo adjudication. The CIT(A) shall issue notice to the assessee on the address mentioned by the assessee in Form No. 35. The assessee shall respond to the notices served upon him, without fail. The CIT(A) shall decide the appeal of assessee after allowing him reasonable opportunity to make submissions/of hearing, in accordance with law. 3 ITA No. 1232/DEL/2024 (AY 2013-14) 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose, in the terms aforesaid. Order pronounced in the open court on Tuesday the 06 th day of August, 2024. Sd/- Sd/- (NAVEEN CHANDRA) (VIKAS AWASTHY) लेखाकार सद᭭य/ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ᭠याियक सद᭭य/JUDICIAL MEMBER िदʟी/Delhi, ᳰदनांक/Dated 06/08/2024 NV/- ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषतCopy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ/The Appellant , 2. ᮧितवादी/ The Respondent. 3. The PCIT 4. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आय.अपी.अिध., िदʟी /DR, ITAT, िदʟी 5. गाडᭅ फाइल/Guard file. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Dy./Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, DELHI