CIT(A) is required to communicate the notice to email id mentioned in Appeal Form 35

CIT(A) is required to communicate the notice through the email id available in Form 35 of the  appeal memo as per CBDT Notification No. 139/2021

In a recent judgment, the ITAT has held that CIT(A) is required to communicate the notice through the email id available in Form 35 of the appeal memo.

ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 4014 (2024) (05) ITAT

Important Case Laws relied upon:
Munjal BCU Centre of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, Ludhiana vs. CIT(E), Chandigarh 160 taxmann.com 629

In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) ex-parte qua the assessee in violation of principles of natural justice.

The assessee has submitted that the CIT(A) had passed the order ex-parte qua the assessee. The assessee submitted that the appellant while filling Form 35, provided his email address. However, in the Income Tax Return (ITR), the email address of the former Chartered Accountant (CA) was indicated.

The CIT(A) had not issued notice to the email address provide by the appellant in Form 35 at column no. 17 or on the email address in profile information but notices were sent to the email of the former CA. Consequently, the appellant could not file/ submit any response, as no notice of hearing was received either on the email address given by him in Form 35 filed before the CIT(A).

It was argued that the order passed by the CIT(A) u/s 250(6) was bad in law as he has failed to appreciate the facts that the assessee has declared agricultural income during the assessment year under consideration and maintained proper record of substantial landholdings for earning the agricultural income. Thus, the ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) without appreciating the merits of the case by issuing a notice on the email address of the former CA was bad in law.

The assessee requested that the matter may be remanded back to the CIT(A) to adjudicate the grounds of merits of the case after granting adequate opportunity of being heard by way of issuing notices on the email address given in Form 35 of the appeal memo.

It was submitted that as per the Notification No. 139 dated 28.12.2021, it is mandatory for the CIT(A) to communicate the notice on the email id. available in the Form 35.

The Tribunal noted that admittedly, the CIT(A) had issued notice on the email address of the former CA given in the Income Tax Return (ITR). The CIT(A) had neither issued notice on the email address given in the profile information or alternate email address given in column no. 17 of Form 35 of appeal memo.

The Tribunal further noted that as per clause 11 of the CBDT Notification No. 139 dated 28.12.2021, the CIT(A) is required to communicate the notice through the email id available in Form 35 of the appeal memo. In our view, the issue of notice by the CIT(A) on the email address other than the email address given in Form 35 of the appeal, tantamount to issue of notice on wrong and invalid address and as such no service of notice.

The Tribunal opined that rejection of appeals without valid service of notice either by postal address or electric communication and further without discussing merits of the case would be held to be in gross violation of principles of natural justice.

The Tribunal further observed that this issue of ex-parte order passed by the CIT(A) due to lack of proper service of notice has been settled by various courts, acknowledging that it is impractical for the assessee to consistently monitor the e-portal of the Income Tax Department. Recently, the Hon’ble Punjab & Haryana High Court observed that the Income Tax Department must communicate notices in accordance with the provisions of law and tax-payers are not accepted to keep the department e-portal open in all the times. It was further observed that before any action is taken by the department, the communication of notice must be in terms of provisions of law. The provisions do not mention that communication to be presumed by placing notice on the e-portal. A pragmatic view has to be adapted always in these circumstances and individual or company is not accepted to keep the e-portal to the department open in all the times to have the knowledge of what the department supposed to be doing with regard to the submissions of Forms etc. The principles of natural justice are inherent in the Income Tax Provisions and same are required to be necessarily followed.

The Tribunal observed that it was evident that the appellant had not been given sufficient opportunity to put up pleas/submissions with regard to the compliance of the notices issued by the CIT(A) as he was not served, any of the notices. Therefore, the assessee would be entitled to be granted sufficient opportunity of being heard to file his reply and the CIT(A) of course be entitled to examine the same and pass afresh order thereafter.

Accordingly, the Tribunal remanded back the matter to the file of the CIT(A) to adjudicate the appeal afresh after granting sufficient opportunity of being heard and considering the submissions made by the appellant assessee. 

Download Full Judgment Click Here >>

• ICSI launches CS Mitr Scheme to give incentive for student registrations
• CPC order u/s 143(1) is appealable and hence no merger with order u/s 143(3) – ITAT
• Under GST Act, there is no specific provision to disclose route of transportation of goods
• Restrictions on use of words “Nidhi Limited”-The Nidhi (Amendment) Rules, 2024
• MCA prescribes period & fee for updating directors personal mobile number & email