What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the CIT(A) should have accepted the manually filed appeal, considering the transition period and the assessee's lack of awareness. The appeal was remanded back to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

The assessee filed an appeal manually within the due date, but the CIT(A) dismissed it for not being filed electronically as per Rule 45. This was the first year of transition to the new e-filing system, and the assessee was unaware of the procedure.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed manually within the due date should be dismissed solely for not being filed electronically, especially during a transition period.

Jaidevi Bhavesh Ajmera vs ITO | ITAT Mumbai 2022

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JM

For Appellant: Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. DR

For Respondent: Ms. Neeta Jeph, Ld. DR

O R D E R

Per Amit Shukla, Judicial Member:

The aforesaid appeal has been filed by the assessee against the order dated 21.01.2019, passed by Ld. CIT(A) – 30, Mumbai for the quantum of assessment passed u/s 143(3) for AY 2010-11.

Assessee is aggrieved by dismissing the appeal of the assessee by Ld. CIT(A) on the ground that appeal was filed by the assessee

Jaidevi Bhavesh Ajmera manually and not electronically without appreciating the fact that the assessee had duly filed the appeal within due date of statutory time limit and this was being the first year of the transition to the new system and assessee was not aware of the new procedure.

From the perusal of record it is seen that assessee had filed the appeal manually within time before the Ld. CIT (A), however, Ld. CIT(A) has simply dismissed the appeal on the ground that assessee has not filed the appeal electronically which is in contravention of Rule 45 of Income Tax Rules. Ld. DR did not have any objection if the matter is remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT (A) for deciding the matter afresh.

After considering the aforesaid undisputed fact that assessee has filed the appeal physically on 21.04.16 which was before the due date of filing the appeal and Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal holding that assessee has filed the appeal manually which is invalid. Admittedly, the scheme of physical filing of appeal was replaced by electronic /online w.e.f. 01.03.2016 vide rule 45 of the Income Tax Rules. Since there was some difficulty in e-filing, CBDT has taken due cognizance of such difficulty and extended the time limit vide its circular. Thus, Ld. CIT(A) should have accepted the Jaidevi Bhavesh Ajmera appeal and decided the appeal on merits when already multiple hearing have taken place. Accordingly, the appeal of the assessee is remanded back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) to decide the issue afresh on merits after giving sufficient opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Orders pronounced in the open court on 30th August, 2022. Sd/- (Amit Shukla) Judicial Member मुंबई Mumbai;ददनांक Dated : 30.08.2022 Sr.PS. Dhananjay आदेशकीप्रनिनिनिअग्रेनर्ि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथी/ The Appellant 2. प्रत्यथी/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयुक्त(अपील) / The CIT(A) आयकरआयुक्त/ CIT- concerned 4. 5. दवभागीयप्रदतदनदध, आयकरअपीलीयअदधकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गार्डफाईल / Guard File आदेशधिुसधर/ BY ORDER,

JAIDEVI BHAVESH AJMERA,MUMBAI vs. ITO -19(2) (1), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments