PRAKASH MANDHWANI,BHOPAL vs. CIT(A), NFAC

PDF
ITA 873/IND/2024Status: DisposedITAT Indore28 April 2025AY 2013-144 pages

No AI summary yet for this case.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, INDORE BENCH, INDORE

Before: SHRI B.M. BIYANI & SHRI PARESH M. JOSHI

For Appellant: Shri Govind Rinwa, AR
For Respondent: Shri Ashish Porwal, Sr. DR
Hearing: 24.04.2025Pronounced: 28.04.2025

आदेश/ O R D E R

Per B.M. Biyani, A.M.:

Feeling aggrieved by order of first-appeal dated 30.10.2024 passed by learned Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-NFAC, Delhi [“CIT(A)”] which in turn arises out of assessment-order dated 23.03.2016 passed by learned ITO, 3(3), Bhopal u/s 143(3) of Income-tax Act, 1961 [“the Act”] for Assessment-Year [“AY”] 2013-14, the assessee has filed this appeal on the grounds as mentioned in Form No. 36 (Appeal Memo).

Page 1 of 4

Prakash Mandhwani ITA No. 873/Ind/2024 - AY 2013-14

2.

The background facts leading to present appeal are such that the

assessee-individual filed return of AY 2013-14 declaring a total income of Rs.

9,34,160/-. The case was subjected to scrutiny assessment through notices

u/s 143(2)/142(1) and the AO completed assessment vide order dated

23.03.2016 u/s 143(3) determining total income at Rs. 87,41,142/- after

making certain additions. Aggrieved, the assessee carried matter in first-

appeal before CIT(A). The CIT(A), however, dismissed assessee’s first-appeal

in limine as un-admitted finding the same as delayed and not filed within the

statutory time period specified in section 249(2) of the Act. Still aggrieved,

the assessee has come in next appeal before us.

3.

Ld. AR of assessee straightaway drew us to Para 1 of impugned order

of CIT(A) to demonstrate certain undisputed basic data i.e. the assessment-

order was passed on 23.03.2016; the same was served upon assessee on

02.04.2016; the assessee filed first-appeal to CIT(A) on 13.06.2016. Then, he

drew us to Para 3 of impugned order wherein the CIT(A) has computed

“01.05.2016” as last date for filing of appeal as per section 249(2) and

thereafter observed a delay of approximate 42 days in filing of appeal before

him.

4.

Ld. AR next drew us to the Circular No. 20/2016 dated 26.05.2016

issued by CBDT, copy of same stands furnished at Page 18 of the

documents filed at the time of filing this appeal. Referring to same, Ld. AR

submitted that prior to 01.03.2016, the first-appeals could be filed manually

Page 2 of 4

Prakash Mandhwani ITA No. 873/Ind/2024 - AY 2013-14

but w.e.f. 01.03.2016, the e-filing of first-appeal was made mandatory.

However, there were certain glitches in the system and therefore the CBDT

came out with aforesaid Circular extending the time-limit for e-filing of

appeals upto 15.06.2016. He submitted that the assessee in present case

originally filed physical appeal on 25.04.2016 (acknowledgement of physical

filing is furnished at Page 14 of the documents filed at the time of filing this

appeal) but thereafter e-filed the same to CIT(A) on 13.06.2016 which is

before 15.06.2016 i.e. before the deadline set up by CBDT. Therefore, the

first-appeal filed by assessee to CIT(A) was a valid appeal having been filed

within the permitted time and the Ld. CIT(A) has inadvertently or wrongly

treated the same as delayed. Ld. AR, therefore, prayed to restore this matter

to the file of CIT(A) with a direction to treat assessee’s first appeal as valid

and adjudicate the same on merit.

5.

Ld. DR representing revenue instantly agreed to the submission and

prayer of Ld. AR.

6.

In view of above, we find that the first-appeal filed by assessee to

CIT(A) was a valid appeal having been filed within the time set up by CBDT

Circular. Therefore, we direct the CIT(A) to treat the asessee’s appeal as valid

and adjudicate the same on merits. Accordingly, this matter is restored to

the file of CIT(A).

Page 3 of 4

Prakash Mandhwani ITA No. 873/Ind/2024 - AY 2013-14

7.

Before parting, we appreciate the precise and to-the-point submission

made by young counsel of assessee in a very lucid manner with reference to

relevant documents and we also appreciate the fairness of Ld. DR of revenue

in giving instant acceptance.

8.

Resultantly, this appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Order pronounced in open court on 28/04/2025

Sd/- Sd/-

(PARESH M. JOSHI) (B.M. BIYANI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

Indore

िदनांक/Dated : 28/04/2025

Patel/Sr. PS Copies to: (1) The appellant (2) The respondent (3) CIT (4) CIT(A) (5) Departmental Representative (6) Guard File By order UE COPYSr. Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Indore Bench, Indore

Page 4 of 4

PRAKASH MANDHWANI,BHOPAL vs CIT(A), NFAC | BharatTax