2025 (2) TMI 918

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... follows:- 1. The JCIT(A) erred in disposing of the appeal ex parte without considering the facts of the case and the submissions made in the proper perspective. 2. The JCIT(A) went wrong in sending the notices u/s. 250 of the IT Act dated 22.11.2024 and 27.11.2024, to the old e-mail address which was duly updated on 29-08-2024. As, the communications and intimations were not sent to the Appellant, the Appellant was unaware of such intimations and could not respond. 3. MERITS 3.1 The JCIT(A) erred in taxing the Appellant's income at 25% instead of 22% u/s. 115BAA of the IT Act, which has come into effect from 20.09.2019. The Appellant having fulfilled all the conditions mentioned under the statute including filing of Form 10-1C,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... assessment year 2020-21. 5. Aggrieved by the intimation issued u/s. 143(1) of the Act, the assessee company filed appeal before First Appellate Authority. For the two notices issued from Office of the CIT(A), there was no response by the assessee. Consequently, First Appellate Authority passed an ex-parte order rejecting appeal of the assessee. 6. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the assessee has filed present appeal before the Tribunal. The Ld.AR submitted that Office of the First Appellate Authority has erroneously sent hearing notice to the e-mail ID '[email protected]', instead of assessee's e-mail ID '[email protected]' shown in Form 35. 7. On merits, the Ld.AR submitted that the CBDT vide its Circular No.6/2022 dated ....