ITAT Restores Ex-Parte Assessment to AO on Cost Due to Notices Sent to Wrong Email

By | November 17, 2025
0 Comment

ITAT Restores Ex-Parte Assessment to AO on Cost Due to Notices Sent to Wrong Email

Issue

Whether an ex-parte assessment and subsequent appellate dismissal can be set aside and remanded for fresh adjudication when the assessee claims non-receipt of statutory notices due to them being sent to a wrong email ID, despite a significant delay of 294 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal.

Facts

  • Assessment: The Assessing Officer (AO) reopened the assessment for A.Y. 2012-13 under Section 147/148. An addition of Rs. 14,83,000/- was made under Section 69A treating cash deposits as unexplained money. The assessment was finalized ex-parte.

  • CIT(A) Order: The Commissioner (Appeals) dismissed the assessee’s appeal ex-parte for non-prosecution.

  • Delay: The assessee filed the appeal before the ITAT with a delay of 294 days.

  • Assessee’s Plea: The assessee contended that they were unaware of the hearing dates because the CIT(A) sent notices to a wrong email ID. No physical notices were served. An affidavit was filed to support this claim. The assessee requested an opportunity to present the case on merits before the AO.

Decision

  • The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) allowed the appeal for statistical purposes.

  • Interest of Justice: The Tribunal held that the interest of justice would be served by granting the assessee an opportunity to present their case before the Assessing Officer.

  • Set Aside and Remand: The impugned order of the CIT(A) was set aside, and the matter was restored to the file of the AO for a fresh decision.

  • Condition Imposed: The restoration was made subject to the assessee depositing a cost of Rs. 5,000/- in the Prime Minister’s Relief Fund and furnishing evidence of this deposit to the AO.

Key Takeaways

  • Natural Justice: Tribunals prioritize the right to a fair hearing (audi alteram partem) over procedural defaults, especially when the default stems from communication errors like sending notices to an incorrect email address.

  • Electronic Service Risks: The validity of service via email relies on the correct address being used. If an assessee can prove (via affidavit) that notices went to a wrong email, ex-parte orders are likely to be quashed.

  • Conditional Relief: Courts/Tribunals may impose monetary costs on the assessee as a deterrent against negligence while simultaneously granting relief to ensure the case is decided on merits rather than technicalities.

  • Statistical Allowance: When a matter is remanded back to the lower authority for fresh adjudication, the appeal is technically treated as “allowed for statistical purposes” in the Tribunal’s records.

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH
BENCH “SMC” CHANDIGARH
Shri Harwinder Singh,
Ubhawal, P.O. Sangrur.
Vs
The ITO,
Ward,
Sangrur.

Source :- 1762508332-ZNUzH7-1-TO