What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found the delay in e-filing to be bonafide and restored the matter to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits. The CIT(A) was directed to dispose of the appeal after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) in paper form within the due date, but failed to e-file it electronically within the permissible time limit. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal summarily due to the delay in e-filing.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in summarily dismissing the appeal for delay in e-filing without condoning the delay. The validity of e-filing provisions under the Income-tax Rules was also raised but not adjudicated.

Parmanand Swetambar Murti Pujak… vs ITO | ITAT Ahmedabad 2018

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

ITA No. 1799/Ahd/2017 Parmanand Swetambar Murti Pujak Jain Trust Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2013-14 Page 1 of 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “A” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

[Coram: Pramod Kumar, AM and Ms. Madhumita Roy, JM]

ITA No. 1799/Ahd/2017 Assessment Year: 2013-14 Parmanand Swetambar Murti Pujak Jain Trust ............…………......Appellant 1, Parmanand Jain Sangh, Nutan Upashray, Arihant Nagar, D Cabin, Sabarmati, Ahmedabad [PAN : AAATP 9942 N] Vs. Income Tax Officer (Exemption) ...........................Respondent Ward-2, Ahmedabad

Appearances by:

SN Divetia for the Appellant Saurabh Singh for the Respondent

Date of concluding the hearing : 22.06.2018 Date of pronouncing the order : 25.06.2018

O R D E R Per Pramod Kumar, AM:

This appeal by the assessee-appellant challenges learned CIT(A)’s order dated 12th May, 2017 summarily dismissing the appeal of the assessee on the ground that it was not e-filed in time.

There is no dispute that the appeal was filed before the CIT(A) on 04.03.2016 in paper form. The assessee did not, however, e-file the appeal electronically until 15.06.2016 when the permissible time limit had already expired. Learned CIT(A) declined to condone the delay and dismissed the appeal summarily. Aggrieved, assessee is in appeal before us.

We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material on record and duly considered facts of the case in the light of the applicable legal position.

Learned representatives fairly agree that the matter should be remitted to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits, as, in any event, we are satisfied about the bonafides of delay in filing e-appeal. In this view of the matter, learned counsel’s arguments pointing out that the mechanism of e-filing does not have the sanction of the statute, and that, in any event, prescription of Income-tax Rules cannot exceed the framework of the Income-tax Act, need not be adjudicated upon.

ITA No. 1799/Ahd/2017 Parmanand Swetambar Murti Pujak Jain Trust Vs. ITO Assessment year: 2013-14 Page 2 of 2 The matter stands restored to the file of the CIT(A) with our direction to dispose of the matter on merits, after giving a reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee, by way of a speaking order and in accordance with the law. We order so.

In the result, appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Pronounced in the open court today on the 25th June, 2018.

Sd/- Sd/-

Ms. Madhumita Roy Pramod Kumar (Judicial Member) (Accountant Member) Ahmedabad, the 25th day of June, 2018 **bt Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) Commissioner (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order TRUE COPY Assistant Registrar Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Ahmedabad benches, Ahmedabad 1. Date of dictation: ................covered matter..25.06.2018.... 2. Date on which the typed draft is placed before the Dictating Member: .. 25.06.2018..... 3. Date on which the approved draft comes to the Sr. P.S./P.S.: …25.06.2018... 4. Date on which the fair order is placed before the Dictating Member for Pronouncement: .. 25.06.2018..... 5. Date on which the file goes to the Bench Clerk : . 29.06.2018 ……. 6. Date on which the file goes to the Head Clerk : ……………………………. 7. The date on which the file goes to the Assistant Registrar for signature on the order: …. 8. Date of Despatch of the Order: ………………......

PARMANAND SWETAMBAR MURTI PUJAK JAIN TRUST,AHMEDABAD vs. ITO (EXEM.), WARD-2, AHMEDABAD

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Recent GST High Court judgments