MS REEMA BHATIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO 26(2)(5), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1115/MUM/2019Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 February 2020AY 2008-093 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 the CIT(A) should have decided the appeal on merits and not dismissed it on a procedural technicality. The matter was restored to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal manually before the CIT(A) against the AO's order. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the grounds that it was not filed electronically as per CBDT notification.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing an appeal solely for not being filed electronically, without deciding on merits. Whether the appeal should be decided on merits after condoning procedural delays.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM

For Appellant: Shri Sameer Shah (AR)
For Respondent: Shri Amit Pratap Singh (DR)
Hearing: 11/02/2020Pronounced: 12/02/2020

Assessee by Shri Sameer Shah (AR) Revenue by Shri Amit Pratap Singh (DR) Date of Hearing 11/02/2020 Date of Pronouncement 12/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. This is the appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A)-38, Mumbai dated 31/12/2018 for the A.Y. 2008-09 in the matter of order passed U/s 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short, the Act).

2.

In this appeal, the assessee is basically aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the assessee’s appeal on the plea that the assessee has not electronically filed the appeal.

Ms Reema Bhatia Vs ITO 3. We have gone through the orders of the authorities below and found that the against the order of the A.O., the assessee has manually filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A). However, the ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the assessee’s appeal on the plea that the assessee should have filed appeal electronically in terms of CBDT notification No. 637(E) dated 01/03/2016. We found that subsequently the assessee has also filed appeal electronically. However, the ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal only on the plea that the assessee did not file appeal electronically as per provisions of Rule 12(3) of I.T. Rules.

The ld. CIT(A) has not decided the issue on merit. In terms of provisions of sub-section (6) of Section 250 of the Act, the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) disposing of the appeal should be in writing and shall state the points for determination, the decision thereon and the reason for the decision. We found that the assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) both manually and electronically, therefore, in the substantial interest of justice, we restore the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) for deciding the matter afresh on merit after condoning delay in filing the appeal electronically and also providing due and reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. The assessee is also directed to appear before the ld. CIT(A) within 60 days from the date of receipt of this order. We direct accordingly.

Ms Reema Bhatia Vs ITO 4. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes only.

Order pronounced in the open court on 12th February, 2020.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →