Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘C’ BENCH, CHENNAI
Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKERY, HON’BLE & SHRI MANJUNATHA. G, HON’BLE
आदेश /O R D E R
PER G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:
These three appeals filed by the assessee are directed against separate but identical orders of the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-7, Chennai, dated 23.05.2017 and pertains to assessment years 2008-09 to 2010-11. Since, facts are identical and issues are common,
:-2-: 996 & 997/Chny/2022 for the sake of convenience these three appeals were heard together and are being disposed off by this consolidated order.
At the outset, there is a delay of 1951 days in filing of three appeals, for which a petition for condonation of delay in filing of appeal along with affidavit explaining reasons for said delay has been filed. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee, submitted that the assessee could not file appeals within time allowed under the Act for the reasons stated in his affidavit as per which he was unaware of the statutory provisions, and relevant procedure for filing of appeals and further, the assessee was not properly advised by the counsel who represented his case before the authorities below. Further, the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee on technical ground for not filing appeals in electronic mode, without discussing the issues on merit. Therefore, to meet the ends of justice, the delay in filing of appeals may be condoned.
The ld. DR, on the other hand fairly admitted that the Ld. CIT(A) had decided the issue on technical ground without discussing on merit and thus, the delay may be condoned and :-3-: 996 & 997/Chny/2022 appeals may be set aside to the file of the CIT(A) to decide the issues on merit.
Having heard both the parties and considered relevant contents of petition filed by the assessee for condonation of delay, we find that although the reasons given by the assessee is not convincing to condone huge delay of 1951 days in filing of appeals, but keeping in view the petitioner averments in affidavit filed in support of condonation of delay and also considering the arguments made by the ld. DR present for the revenue, we are of the considered view that to give one more opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the delay in filing of appeals needs to be condoned and thus, the delay in filing of three appeals is condoned and appeals filed by the assessee are admitted for adjudication.
The brief facts of the case are that, the assessment for the assessment year 2008-09 has been completed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”) on 29.03.2016. The assessment for assessment year 2009-10 has been completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 19.12.2011. Similarly, the assessment for assessment year
:-4-: 996 & 997/Chny/2022 2010-11 has been completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act on 27.12.2012. The assessee preferred an appeal against the order of the assessment before the first appellant authority and said appeal has been filed in paper format. The ld. CIT(A), dismissed appeal filed by the assessee for all three assessment years by following the Circular issued by CBDT in terms of Rule 45 of IT Rules, 1962, dated 01st March, 2016 which mandates the appellant to file appeal in electronic format w.e.f. 01.03.2016. Since, the assessee has filed appeal on 27.04.2016 in paper format, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed appeals filed by the assessee as invalid and void-ab-initio. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us.
We have heard both the parties, perused materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. There is no dispute with regard to the fact that the assessee has filed manual appeals for all three assessment years, even though Rule 45 of IT Rules, 1962 has amended w.e.f. 01.03.2016 and mandates filing of appeal before the first appellant authority in electronic format. But, fact remains that during transition period many appellants have filed
:-5-: 996 & 997/Chny/2022 appeals in manual formats, because of unaware of amended Rules and notification issued there under. No doubt, the appeals filed by the assessee in paper format is not in accordance with Rule 45 of IT Rules, 1962, but fact remains that since the appellant has filed appeals within time allowed under the Act, even though said appeal was not in prescribed format as per Rule 45 of IT Rules, 1962, ld. CIT(A) ought to have advised the appellant to file appeal papers in electronic format to advance substantial justice. Further on technical ground, if an appeal is dismissed, a meritorious case may go out of judicial scrutiny. Therefore, keeping in view the amended Rule 45 of IT Rules, 1962 and timing of appeals filed by the assessee, we are of the considered view that during transition period, a liberal view should have been taken by the first appellant authority while deciding the appeals. Since, the first appellant authority has dismissed the appeals filed by the assessee on technical grounds without deciding the issues on merit, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to go back to the file of the CIT(A) for deciding the issues on merit. Thus, we set aside the orders of the CIT(A) for all three assessment years and restore the issues back to the file of the CIT(A) and direct the CIT(A) to admit appeals filed by the :-6-: 996 & 997/Chny/2022 assessee and decide the issues on merit. Needless to say, the assessee shall comply with Rule 45 of IT Rules, 1962 and file necessary appeal papers in electronic format within three months from the date of receipt of this order and file necessary details to justify his case.