MAHARASHTRA FILM STAGE |& CULTURAL DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION LTD,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 16(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 4847/MUM/2018Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai19 February 2020AY 2013-143 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 mere technical lapses, like manual filing instead of electronic, should not deprive an assessee of justice. The assessee was directed to e-file the appeal within a specified period.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal manually, but the prescribed procedure required an electronic filing. The appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) for not adhering to the electronic filing mandate.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed manually, when electronic filing is mandated, is admissible. Whether technical procedural lapses should lead to dismissal of an appeal on merits.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 249(1)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VP & HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM

For Appellant: Ms. Malathy Pillai-Ld.AR
For Respondent: Ms. Jyoti Lakshmi Nayak-Ld. DR

Assessee by : Ms. Malathy Pillai-Ld.AR Revenue by : Ms. Jyoti Lakshmi Nayak-Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ : 05/02/2020 Date of Hearing घोषणा की तारीख / : 19/02/2020 Date of Pronouncement आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [in short referred to as ‘AY’] 2013-14 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-4, Mumbai, [in short referred to as ‘CIT(A)’], Appeal No. CIT(A)-4/IT-120/ACIT-16(1)/2016-17 dated 03/05/2018, inter-alia, on the ground that Ld. CIT(A) erred in dismissing the appeal by 2 Assessment Year :2013-14 treating the manual appeal filed by the assessee as inadmissible by invoking the provisions of Section 249(1).

2.

Briefly stated, the assessee was assessed for year under consideration u/s 143(3) on 29/03/2016 wherein the income was determined at Rs.22.34 Crores after certain additions. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred further appeal before learned first appellate authority. The appeal was filed in manual form on 25/04/2016. However, as per extant rules, the assessee was required to file the appeal in electronic form latest by 15/06/2016. Although the assessee was apprised of the said fact, however, it failed to attend the proceedings and consequently, the appeal was dismissed being not maintainable. Aggrieved, the assessee is under further appeal before us.

3.

Upon careful consideration, we find that the appeal has been dismissed only in view of the fact that it was filed in manual form instead of electronic form as mandated by extant rules. However, the undisputed facts that emerges are that the manual appeal was filed within time prescribed for filing the appeal. The said appeal in terms of CBDT Notification No. SO 637(E) [No. 11/2016 (F. No. 149/150/2015-TPL)], dated 1-3-2016, was required to file digitally in electronic form. The failure to file the same in the prescribed form has resulted into dismissal of appeal in limine. Keeping in view the principles of natural justice, we are of the considered opinion that mere technical lapses could not deprive the assessee to seek justice in deserving cases. Therefore, in terms of the judgment of this Tribunal rendered in All India Federation of Tax Petitioners Vs. ITO [ITA No. 7134/Mum/2017 dated 04/05/2018], the assessee is directed to e-file the appeal in the prescribed manner before

More judgments on Section 249(1)

All 50 judgments and leading authorities on Section 249(1) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →