MR. DINESH TARACHAND PARIHAR ,MUMBAI V. ITO WARD 27(1)(1), MUMBAI

ITA 114/MUM/2025

AI Insights

The case involves Mr. Dinesh Tarachand Parihar, the appellant, who appealed against the exparte assessment order passed under sections 147 read with 143(3) of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2018-19. The primary grievance was the dismissal of his appeal by the CIT(A) for want of prosecution, and the initial assessment was also passed exparte as the assessee failed to comply with the notices. The Tribunal noted that the notices were sent to an outdated email ID of his former tax consultant, leading to non-compliance. The Tribunal found merit in the assessee's application for condonation of delay, supported by an affidavit explaining his lack of technological knowledge and the mishandling of his email by his former tax consultant.

• Counselvise Citation: [2025] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 26511 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-02-2025
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2018-2019
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R.R. MAKWANA
• Assessee Lawyers: PRASHANT GHUMRE
• Keywords: Condonation of delay
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

" IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘D’ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER & MS PADMAVARHY S, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No.114/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year :2018-19) Mr. Dinesh Tarachand Parihar 23B, Dadoji Konddev Nagar, Govandi Road Ghatla, Chembur Mumbai – 400 071 Vs. ITO-Ward-27(1)(1) Room No.406, 4th Floor Tower No.6, Vashi Station Complex Vashi – 400 703 PAN/GIR No.ALNPP0522G (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Prashant Ghumre Revenue by Shri R.R. Makwana Date of Hearing 20/02/2025 Date of Pronouncement 24/02/2025 आदेश / O R D E R PER AMIT SHUKLA (J.M): The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against order dated 15/07/2024 passed by NFAC, Delhi for the quantum of assessment passed u/s.147 r.w.s. 143(3) for the A.Y.2018-19. 2. Assessee is aggrieved by the exparte order passed by the ld. CIT(A) who has not decided the appeal on merits and dismissed the appeal for want of prosecution. Further, it is seen that even the assessment order has been passed exparte ITA No.114/Mum/2025 Dinesh Tarachand Parihar 2 u/s.144 as assessee could not make any compliance of notices sent to him as noted by him at pages 2 & 3 of the assessment order. Apart from that there is a delay of 117 days in filing of the appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Before us ld. Counsel has submitted an application for condonation of delay duly supported by an affidavit of the assessee. In the said affidavit it had been stated that assessee is only 10th pass and he is not aware of any gadgets or technology and does not even know how to operate his e-mail and access to the ITBA portal. Earlier, one Mr. Ranjit Singh Ashiya, a tax consultant was handling his income tax matters, who was a commerce graduate and registered as Income Tax Practitioner (ITP). His e-mail ID was given in the income tax return which is [e-mail] . His e-mail ID was given in the return of income filed up to A.Y.2017-18. From A.Y.2018-19 to till date the email ID was given as [e-mail]. 4. The Income Tax notices u/s.148 etc., were sent on e- mail ID of his erstwhile ITP who did not inform the assessee and therefore, assessee was not aware of any such e-mail ID. Even thereafter, assessee has changed Counsel who has updated ITBA portal with his new e-mail ID. All the notices issued by the ld. AO were issued on e-mail ID of [e-mail] and not on his registered e-mail ID [e-mail]. Accordingly, there was a non- compliance of notices. This fact has been duly elaborated in the affidavit of the assessee. Accordingly, in view of the ITA No.114/Mum/2025 Dinesh Tarachand Parihar 3 aforesaid facts and circumstances that notices were sent on an e-mail ID which was not in use and the ITP whose e-mail ID was given earlier was no longer his authorised representative and none of the notices or order of the ld. CIT(A) was served on assessee’s e-mail which was uploaded on the ITBA portal. Under these circumstances, we condone the delay of 117 days and also remit the case back to the file of the ld. AO to decide the issue afresh and pass a fresh assessment order after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and send the notices on the correct e-mail ID. 5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. 4. His Order pronounced on 24th February, 2025. Sd/- (PADMAVATHY S) Sd/- (AMIT SHUKLA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 24/02/2025 KARUNA, sr.ps Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. CIT 4. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 5. Guard file. ITA No.114/Mum/2025 Dinesh Tarachand Parihar 4 BY ORDER, (Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai //True Copy// "