SUREKHA CHHABRA, ABOHAR V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-2(3), ABOHAR, ABOHAR

ITA 319/ASR/2024

• Counselvise Citation: [2024] 101 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5908 (ITAT-AMRITSAR)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 17 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 08-07-2024
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 03-07-2024
• Assessment Year: 2017-2018
• Appeal Filed On: 21-05-2024
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Principle of natural justice; Set aside
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR (HYBRID COURT) BEFORE DR. M. L. MEENA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SH. UDAYAN DASGUPTA, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. No. 319/Asr/2024 Assessment Year: 2017-18 Surekha Chhabra, Prop. Chhabra-76, Street No. 15B, Abohar 152116, Punjab [PAN: AANPC 2759B] (Appellant) Vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward-2(3), Abohar (Respondent) Appellant by Respondent by : : Sh. Sudhir Sehgal, AR Sh. Ravinder Mittal, Sr. DR Date of Hearing Date of Pronouncement : : 04.07.2024 09.07.2024 ORDER Per Dr. M. L. Meena, AM: The captioned appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 30/03/2024 passed by the ld. National Faceless Appeal Centre Delhi [NFAC/CIT(A)] challenging therein rejection of appeal ex-parte qua 2 ITA No. 319/Asr/2024 Surekha Chhabra v. ITO the assessee without service of notice in violation of principles of natural justice. 2. At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted that in the case of the assessee, all the notices of hearing during the course of appellate proceedings were issued by the Worthy CIT(A) on the email of earlier counsels i.e. [e-mail],[e-mail] and [e-mail] and, the earlier counsels neither inform the assessee regarding such notices nor did respond to the hearing notices as issued during the course of appellate proceedings. Consequently, the assessee could not file his detailed submissions during appellate proceedings which resulted in dismissal of the appeal of the assessee exparte without providing the assessee with a reasonable opportunity of being heard in view of principles of natural justice to file his detailed submissions required by the Ld. CIT appeal. 3. Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Bench with a prayer that the case of the assessee may kindly be set aside to the file of the Worthy CIT(A) to be decided the matter de novo by assuring the assessee’s due cooperation during the appellate proceedings. 3 ITA No. 319/Asr/2024 Surekha Chhabra v. ITO 4. Per contra, the ld. DR has no objection in view of principles of natural justice. 5. Heard the rival contentions, perused the record, impugned order, written submission, and case laws cited before us. Admittedly, the notices were issued by the ld. CIT(A) were served on the email address of the earlier counsels, and who had neither inform the assessee regarding such notices nor did respond to the hearing notices as issued during the course of appellate proceedings. The facts of non-service of notice on the assessee is supported with notarized affidavit filed on record, in the course of proceedings which reads as: AFFIDAVIT I Surekha Chhabra w/o Shri Sohan Lal Chhabra R/o Street No. 15 near Singh Sabha School, Abohar, 152026 [Punjab], do hereby solemnly affirm as under: 1. That I am assessed to tax vide PAN: AANPC2759B. 2. That for the AY 2017-18, my case was selected for scrutiny and for such assessment, I engaged a counsel in order to comply with the notices issued from time to time. 3. That the assessment order dated 17.12.2019 was passed u/s 143(3) of The Income Tax Act, 1961 for the AY 2017-18. 4 ITA No. 319/Asr/2024 Surekha Chhabra v. ITO 4. That against the assessment order dated 17.12.2019, I filed an appeal before Worthy CIT(A) within due time and during the course of appellate proceedings I engaged a different counsel. 5. That' during the course of appellate proceedings, all the notices were issued by Worthy CIT(A) on the email id of the previous counsel and he did not intimate me about the said notices issued by Worthy CIT(Å). 6. That I did not know about the notices issued by Worthy CIT(A) as none of the notices were ever intimated to me by the counsel concerned and hence, I could not comply with the hearing notices issued by the Worthy CIT (A) during the course of appellate proceedings. 7. That due to such non-compliances during the course of appellate proceedings, my case was decided ex-parte and appellate order date 30.03.2024 was passed u/s 250 of the Act. 2 4 JUN 8. That when I received the communication from the Income Tax Department wherein, demand for AY 2017-18 was pressed, only then I came to know about the concluded appellate order and then, I approached another counsel Sh. Ashwani Juneja who then downloaded the order from the Income Tax Portal and then the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble ITAT. 5 ITA No. 319/Asr/2024 Surekha Chhabra v. ITO 9. Thus, immediately when I came to know about the concluded appellate proceedings in my case, I took steps to file appeal before Hon'ble ITAT. This lapse is highly regretted and further, I undertake to fully comply with the notice issued in the further course of proceedings if the matter is set aside to the file of Worthy CIT(A). Place: Ludhiana Date: 24.06.2024 Verified whatsoever is stated above is true to the best of my knowledge & belief. Place: Ludhia na Date: 24.06.2 024 6. From above, it is apparently clear that during the course of appellate proceedings, the notices of hearing were sent by the Ld. CIT(A) only on the email id of earlier counsels not on the email address of the assessee given in Form 35 of Memorandum of appeal (APB, Pg. 35)and the earlier 6 ITA No. 319/Asr/2024 Surekha Chhabra v. ITO counsels did not inform the assessee regarding the hearing notices issued by the Worthy CIT(A) as mentioned in the impugned order. Thus, in the present case the assessee, the appellate order has been passed by the CIT(Å) without granting the assessee sufficient opportunity of being heard in view of principles of natural justice. 7. In our view, it is appropriate to accept the request of the assessee to set aside the matter to the file of CIT (A) to be decided de novo with the appellants assurance to cooperate during the appellate proceedings before CIT(A) which would not cause any prejudice to the revenue. 8. From the impugned order, we find that the decision relied, do not apply to the specific facts of the present case, as the appellant was not served any notice, message or email prior to the rejection of the appl. Meaning thereby that the rejection of the application is illegal, due to the lack of substantive evaluation; without properly serving the department's notices to the appellant and based solely on the alleged absence of necessary submissions by the appellant. 9. In our view, it is essential for the Ld. CIT(A) that before any action is taken, a communication of the notice must be in terms of the provisions as enumerated as per provisions of law. The provisions do not mention of 7 ITA No. 319/Asr/2024 Surekha Chhabra v. ITO communication to be “presumed” by placing notice on the e-portal. In this regard, reliance is being placed upon the judgment delivered by the Hon’ble HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA in the case of Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship v. Commissioner of Income-tax (Exemptions)[2024] 160 taxmann.com 629 (Punjab & Haryana) where it has been held that merely uploading of information about the date of hearing on the Income Tax Portal is not an effective service of notice as per the provisions of Section 282 of the Income Tax Act. The relevant text of the judgments is being produced hereunder: - Method of communication of notice - Service of notice generally u/s 282(1) - as per assessee SCN was not sent on the petitioner’s email or otherwise and was only reflected on the e-portal of the Department - Notice initiating proceedings under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) - HELD THAT:- It is essential that before any action is taken, a communication of the notice must be in terms of the provisions as enumerated herein above. The provisions do not mention of communication to be “presumed” by placingnotice on the e-portal. A pragmatic view has to be adopted always in thesecircumstances. An individual or a Company is not expected to keep the e-portal ofthe Department open all the time so as to have knowledge of what the Department issupposed to be doing with regard to the submissions of forms etc..The principles ofnatural justice are inherent in the income tax provisions and the same are requiredto be necessarily followed. This Court is of the firm view that the petitioner has not been given sufficient opportunity to put up his pleas with regard to the proceedings under Section 12A(1)(ac)(iii) of the Act of 1961 and as he was not served with any notice. Therefore, he would be entitled to file his reply and the Department would of course be entitled to examine the same and pass a fresh order thereafter. Writ Petition is allowed, and the order is quashed and set aside.” 8 ITA No. 319/Asr/2024 Surekha Chhabra v. ITO 10. In the present case, in the absence of the assessee being aware of the notices issued by the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee cannot be faulted for not responding to the quires raised by the Ld. CIT(A) as if it was never conveyed to the assessee. Therefore, the action of the Ld. CIT(A) cannot be sustained. 11. Accordingly, we set aside the impugned order and restore the mater back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) with a direction to issue notices to the correct registered email ID of assessee and grant proper opportunity of being heard to the assessee before passing the order in accordance with law. 12. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 09.07.2024 Sd/- Sd/- (Udayan Dasgupta) (Dr. M. L. Meena) Judicial Member Accountant Member *doc* Copy of the order forwarded to: (1)The Appellant: (2) The Respondent: (3) The CIT concerned (4) The Sr. DR, I.T.A.T. True Copy By Order