Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH
Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav & Shri Amarjit Singh
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD “SMC” BENCH Before: Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member And Shri Amarjit Singh, Accountant Member ITA No. 3151/Ahd/2016 Assessment Year 2013-14
Eagle Steel Industries P. The ITO, Ltd. Plot No. 9, Sanghi Ward-2(1)(1), Cement Godown, Sarkhej Vs Ahmedabad Sanand Highway, Village: (Respondent) Ularia, Ahmedabad-382210 PAN: AABCE6483F (Appellant)
Revenue by: Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: None
Date of hearing : 26-04-2018 Date of pronouncement : 18-05-2018 आदेश/ORDER PER : AMARJIT SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:-
This assessee’s appeal for A.Y. 2013-14, arises from order of the CIT(A)- 2, Ahmedabad dated 20-09-2016, in proceedings under section 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short “the Act”.
The assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- “1. The Ld. CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in dismissing appeal of the appellant to be non maintainable relying upon CBDT Circular No. 20/2016 dated 25/05/2016 without appreciating that the appeal was already heard on 29/04/2016. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) erred on facts and in law in confirming disallowance of Rs. 34,43,324/- by invoking provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act.”
I.T.A No. 3151/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 2 Eagle Steel Industries P. Ltd. vs. ITO
The brief fact of the case is that return of income declaring income of Rs. 7,76,320/- was filed on 16th August, 2013. Subsequently, the case was selected under scrutiny by issuing of notice u/s. 143(2) of the act on 5th June, 2015. On scrutiny, it was discerned to the assessing officer that assessee had not made compliance with the provision of section 194C by not deducing tax on payment made in respect of expenditure incurred for freight and transport. Consequently, the assessing officer has made disallowance of transport charges of Rs. 34,43,324/- u/s. 40(a)(ia) of the act.
Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that assessee has made delay in filing the appeal on electronic mode.
We have heard the Ld. DR and perused the material on record carefully. The case of the assessee was subject to scrutiny assessment. During the course of scrutiny assessment, it was discerned to the assessing officer that assesse has failed to deduct tax on payment of freight and transport expenses as per the provisions of section 194C of the act. Consequently, the assessing officer had made disallowance of Rs. 34,34,324/- under the provisions of section 40(a)(ai) of the act. The assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that assessee has not filed the appeal electronically by referring the notification no. 11/2006 (F.No. 149/150/2015-TPL dated 01/03/2016 of the CBDT. We have noticed that vide circular no. 20/2016 dated 26/05/2011 of CBDT, the date of filing of appeal by electronic mode was extended up to 15/06/2016, however, the assessee had filed it electronically on 02/09/2016. At the initial stage the assessee had filed the appeal in the paper form in form no. 35 on 30/03/2016. We have also noticed that the assessee had brought to the notice of the ld. CIT(A) that delay in filing appeal on electronic mode was because of unintended technical lapse. In this connection, we observed that the online filing of appeal was newly introduced
I.T.A No. 3151/Ahd/2016 A.Y. 2013-14 Page No 3 Eagle Steel Industries P. Ltd. vs. ITO
during the year under consideration because of which the assessee had faced difficulty in uploading the appeal electronically in the system. The issuing of circulars by the CBDT for extending the date of filing the appeal implicit constraint and elucidate the hiccup in uploading the prescribed appeal in the system electronically. We also noticed that the assessee had filed the appeal on 30/03/2016 manually within the due date which could not be uploaded electronically because of the reasons stated supra in this order. The above stated facts and findings indeed indicate that there was a bona fide reasonable cause for not filing the appeal electronically by the assessee, therefore, as per our considered opinion the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in dismissing the appeal. In view of the above facts and circumstances, we restore this appeal to the file of the ld. CIT (A) for adjudication on merit after affording adequate opportunities to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assesee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 18-05-2018
Sd/- Sd/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (AMARJIT SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Ahmedabad : Dated 18/05/2018 आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. Assessee 2. Revenue 3. Concerned CIT 4. CIT (A) 5. DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. Guard file. By order/आदेश से, उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद