M/S. AMIGO FINSTOCK PVT. LTD.,AHMEDABAD vs. THE ITO, WARD-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal condoned the technical delay in filing the appeal electronically and directed the CIT(A) to admit the e-appeal for disposal on merits.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed a manual appeal before the CIT(A) instead of an electronic one, as required by amended rules. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal as defective and non-maintainable.
What were the issues?
Whether a manually filed appeal, when electronic filing is mandated, is maintainable and whether the delay should be condoned.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “B” BENCH, AHMEDABAD
Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA
सुनवाई क� तार�ख / Date of 10/12/2019 Hearing घोषणा क� तार�ख /Date of 10/12/2019 Pronouncement आदेश/O R D E R PER PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA - AM:
The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Ahmedabad, (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 23.10.2017 arising in the assessment order dated 14.03.2016 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2013-14.
In the captioned appeal, the assessee is aggrieved by the action of the CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal before it as defective and non-maintainable and thus refused to adjudicate the appeal on merits.
On perusal of the order of the CIT(A), it is noticed that the assessee had filed paper appeal manually before CIT(A) instead of filing appeal electronically as amended under Rules 45 of I.T. Rules 1962 w.e.f. 01/03/2016. The CIT(A) thus observed that it was incumbent upon the assessee to file appeal electronically to pursue remedy available before him. The CIT(A) thereafter observed that the case of the assessee is covered by provisions of section 249 r.w.Rule 45 of I.T.Rules, 1962 which lays down that every appeal shall be filed in the prescribed form and shall be verified in the prescribed manner. The CIT(A) accordingly found that the paper appeal so filed by the assessee is defective appeal and non- maintainable for adjudication of appeal. The CIT(A) accordingly dismissed the appeal of the assessee as defective and non- maintainable.
In the context, we note that the assessee has duly filed the paper appeal which was receipted by the office of the CIT(A) on 13/04/2016. We also take note of the fact that assessee has also filed e-appeal on 12.05.2017 with a request to the CIT(A) for condonation of delay. In these circumstances and having regard to the fact that e-filing was introduced about that time in the vicinity of paper appeal filed by the assessee, it is quite possible that assessee may not be conversant with technical aspects. The breach committed by the assessee is clearly of technical nature. We are thus of the considered opinion that a benign view be taken in the circumstances. Therefore, we consider it appropriate to grant opportunity to assessee for disposal of appeal in accordance with law. We thus direct the CIT(A) to admit the e-appeal for its disposal on merits.
The assessee therefore shall be entitled to file the appeal electronically afresh (if not filed so far) within 30 days of service of this order for adjudication on merits. Intervening technical delay in filing the appeal as per the prescribed method stands condoned. The matter is remanded back to the file of CIT(A) for adjudication of issues.
In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
This Order pronounced in Open Court on 10/12/2019
Sd/- Sd/- (MADHUMITA ROY) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 10/12/2019 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,
उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।
More judgments on Section 249
- Sanjay Mishra, Rewa vs Income Tax Officer Ward-1, RewaITA 82/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S. Kalindi Ispat Pvt. Ltd., BilaspurITSSA 22/JAB/2018[2014-15]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2014-15
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S. Kalindi Ispat Pvt. Ltd., BilaspurITSSA 21/JAB/2018[2013-14]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
- Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax… vs M/S. Kalindi Ispat Pvt. Ltd., BilaspurITSSA 17/JAB/2018[2009-10]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2009-10
- Sanjay Mishra, Rewa vs Income Tax Officer Ward-1, RewaITA 82/JAB/2025[2013-14]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2013-14
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S Larsen And Toubro Limited vs. Joint Commissioner Of Central GST And Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- T C Global INDIA Private Limited vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central GST, North DelhiDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Kamlasana Impex Private Limited vs. Director General Of GST Intelligence (Hq) Delhi) & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Ritu Gautam Proprietor Of Ms Heritage International vs. Additional Commissioner Central Goods And Services Tax Appeals Ii Delhi & Anr.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- Sutha vs. The State Tax Officer(Inspection-3)Madras · 27 Oct 2026