Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘’ SMC’’ BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI RAJPAL YADAV & SHRI WASEEM AHMED
आदेश/O R D E R
PER WASEEM AHMED, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Assessee against the order of the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-10, Vadodara, dated 05/02/2019 arising in the matter of assessment order passed under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (here-in-after referred to as "the Act") relevant to the Assessment Year 2014-15.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal: 1.1 The order passed u/s 250 passed on 7-3-2019 by CIT(A)-10, A'bad for A.V. 2014-15 dismissing the appeal as duplicate is wholly illegal, unlawful and against the principles of natural justice. 1.2 The Ld. CIT(A) has grievously erred in law and or on facts in holding that the e-appeal filed on 10.01.2018 was a duplicate appeal and thereby dismissing it in limine is wholly illegal and unlawful. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have considered the circumstances in which the paper appeal filed by the appellant was dismissed on 29.01.2018 as non-maintainable. The Ld. CIT(A) has completely overlooked the material on record in this regard. . 2.1 That in the facts and circumstances of the case as well as in law, the CIT(A) had erred in holding that no appellate order was pending against the order of AO dated 21.11.2016 so that this appeal was duplicate. It is, therefore, prayed that the order passed by CIT(A) dated 7.3.2019 may be set aside and matter may be restored back to the file of CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.
3. The interconnected issue raised by the assessee is that the learned CIT (A) erred in holding that the appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable as the appeal was filed manually ignoring the fact that the appeal was subsequently filed electronically.
4. In the present case the assessment was framed under section 143(3) of the Act after making the additions of Rs. 33,59,823/- to the total income of the assessee being long term capital gain on account of sale of land/property.
4.1 The assessee against the above order of the AO carried the matter to the learned CIT (A) by filing the appeal manually dated 29 December 2016. However, the learned CIT (A) vide letter dated 28-12-2017 required the assessee to furnish the appeal in electronic mode as required by the CBDT vide instruction No. 11/2016 (F. No.149/150/2015-TPL) dated 1 March 2016. The assessee accordingly filed the appeal in electronic mode dated 10 January 2018. The learned CIT (A) subsequently vide order dated 29th January 2018 has dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee manually dated 29 December 2016 by observing that the manual appeal filed by the assessee is not maintainable in pursuance to the directions issued by the CBDT.
4.2 The assessee subsequently approached to the learned CIT (A) for adjudication of the issue raised by him in the appeal filed in electronic mode vide letter dated 13th February 2018. But the learned CIT (A) vide order dated 7 March 2019 dismissed the appeal of the assessee by observing that his predecessor has already disposed of the appeal of the assessee. Therefore, no separate adjudication of the impugned appeal is required being a duplicate appeal.
Aggrieved assessee preferred an appeal before us.
The assessee in the statement of fact submitted that the learned CIT (A) has dismissed the appeal filed by him electronically inadvertently by observing that the same has already been adjudicated by his predecessor. Thus, the assessee in the statement of facts prayed us to set aside the issue to the file of the learned CIT (A) for the fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law.
On the contrary, the learned DR did not raise any objection if the matter is set aside to the file of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication as per the provisions of law.
We have heard the learned DR and perused the materials available on record. Admittedly the assessee has furnished the appeal in electronic form dated 10 January 2018 in pursuance to the direction issued by the learned CIT (A). The manual appeal filed by the assessee dated 29 December 2016 was accordingly rightly rejected by the learned CIT (A). However, the learned CIT (A) inadvertently also rejected the appeal filed by the assessee in electronic form treating the same as duplicate appeal and by holding that his predecessor has already decided the issue raised by the assessee. To our understanding, an inadvertent mistake has been crept in the order of the learned CIT (A) which requires necessary adjudication at his level. Therefore, we set aside the issue to the file of the learned CIT (A) for fresh adjudication the appeal filed in electronic mode as per the provisions of law.
The assessee is at the liberty to file necessary documents in support of his claim. Hence, the ground of appeal raised by the assessee is allowed for the statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the Court on 14/12/2021 at Ahmedabad.