M/S ANUSHKA SOFT-TEL PVT LTD,MUMBAI vs. ITO WARD-12(1)(2), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2227/MUM/2022Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai28 November 2022AY 2008-094 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should not have dismissed the appeal on technical grounds without giving the assessee an opportunity to rectify the omission. The appeal was restored to the file of the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal manually before the CIT(A) which was dismissed on technical grounds for not being filed electronically as per a new notification. The assessee had also not appeared before the CIT(A) despite opportunities.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal on a technical ground of manual filing when an electronic filing was mandated, without providing an opportunity to rectify the defect.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 68,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “A” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI ABY T. VARKEY, JM & SHRI S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM

For Appellant: Shri Poojan Mehta
Hearing: 03/11/2022Pronounced: 28/11/2022

O R D E R

PER ABY T. VARKEY, JM:

1.

This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-20, Mumbai dated 18.02.2020 for AY. 2008-09.

2.

At the outset, we take note of the ground no. 2 which is against the action of the Ld. CIT(A) in passing the ex-parte order.

3.

Brief facts in respect of grounds of appeal

of the assessee is that the AO has passed the assessment order dated 31.03.2016 u/s 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter “the Act”) wherein the AO had added Rs.19,00,00,000/- u/s 68 of the Act. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which was filed on 26.04.2016 however the same was dismissed on technical ground by the Ld. CIT(A) by holding as under: -

2. A.Y. 2008-09 Anushka Soft-Tel Pvt. Ltd. “5. Decision: 5.1 The appellant has filed appeal manually and as per the notification no. S.O.637(E) dated 1st March, 2016, the appeal has to be filed electronically w.e.f 01.03.2016. However, the appellant failed to file the appeal electronically and also did not make any submission or appeared before the undersigned, despite opportunity given in this regard. In view of the above, the paper appeal filed is treated as non- est.”

4. Aggrieved by the aforesaid action of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee is before us raising ground no. 2 (supra).

5.

We have heard both the parties and perused the records. We note from perused of the impugned order (supra) that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on technical reasons and not on merits. We do not countenance the impugned action of Ld.CIT(A). For the interest of justice and fair play we restore the appeal back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), with a direction that appeal of the assessee be adjudicated by Ld.CIT(A) as per sub-section (6) of Section 250 of the Act i.e. the CIT(A) shall dispose of the appeal after stating the points for determination and by giving reasons for the decision. The assessee is directed to file electronically also the appeal. We note that the assessee had filed the manually the appeal on 26.04.2016 against AO’s order dated 31.03.2016. We note that the notification recording compulsory e-filing of appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) was w.e.f 31.03.2016 and the assessee had filed it manually on 26.04.2016 in the office of Ld.CIT(A) on 26.04.2016; and if the assessee was 3 A.Y. 2008-09 Anushka Soft-Tel Pvt. Ltd. alerted/cautioned about this omission [of filing the same electronically], and given an opportunity to rectify the same, then the assessee could have filed the same electronically and then such an action on the part of Ld CIT(A) could have been avoided. Ignorance on the part of the assessee should not have been taken advantage of by authorities, rather the assessee ought to have been told/advised to file immediately the appeal in electronic form as directed by CBDT. Anyway, for the interest of justice and fair play, since we have restored the appeal filed by the assessee back to the file of the Ld. CIT(A), the assessee to upload the appeal electronically and the Ld. CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate the appeal as if the same has been filed in time (i.e. within limitation period) and decide question of law as well as the merits of the addition made by the AO in accordance to the law.

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →