Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, SMC, “C’’ BENCH : BANGALORE
Before: SHRI B.R BASKARAN
O R D E R Per B.R Baskaran, Accountant Member
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 22-12-2017 passed by Ld CIT(A)-7, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment year 2013-14. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee by holding the same as invalid.
The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee challenged the assessment order by filing appeal manually on 11.4.2016. Since the Rules have been amended providing for filing of appeal electronically, the assessee filed another set of appeal electronically on 19-02-2018. The appeal so filed electronically was belated by 681 days. Hence the Ld CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee.
The Ld A.R submitted that the assessee received copy of assessment order on 10-03-2016 and hence the due date for filing appeal before Ld CIT(A) was 09-04-2016. Since 09-04-2016 and 10-04-2016 happened to be holidays, i.e., Saturday and Sunday respectively, the assessee filed appeal manually on 11.04.2016. Accordingly he submitted that there was no delay in filing appeal before Ld CIT(A). Subsequently, in order to comply with the requirement of amended provisions, the assessee filed appeal again electronically on 19-02-2018. He submitted that the Ld CIT(A) did not recognise the appeal filed by the assessee manually and took cognizance of appeal filed electronically. Accordingly he has held that there was delay in filing appeal and accordingly dismissed the appeal.
The Ld A.R placed his reliance on the decision rendered by Chennai bench of Tribunal in the case of Shri G.P. Saravanan vs. ITO (ITA No.279/Chny/2019 dated 10-05-2019) and submitted that the co-ordinate bench of Tribunal, on identical set of facts, has held that the Ld CIT(A) shall consider the appeal on merits and dispose of the same in accordance with law.
The Ld D.R, on the contrary, supported the order passed by Ld CIT(A).
I heard the parties and perused the record. I notice that an identical issue was considered by the Chennai bench of Tribunal in the above cited case and the same was decided as under:-
“14. Having heard the Ld.counse) for the assessee and the Ld. D.R., this Tribunal finds that the appeal was manually filed on 02.05.2016. It is not the case of the Revenue that any defect memo was issued or the appeal was returned. When the appeal was filed by the assessee manually, if it is not in tune with the statutory requirement, it is for the CIT(Appeals) either to issue a defect memo or to return the appeal filed manually, to the assessee. Admittedly, no such action was taken by the CIT(Appeals). The appeal was e- filed on 22.12.2018. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that when the assessee admittedly filed the appeal manually on 02.05.2016 and also e-filed on 22.12.2018, the assessee's e- filing of appeal would relate back to the original date of filing appeal manually on 02.05.2016. In other words, there is no delay in filing the appeal. If e- filing of appeal on 22.12.2018 relates back to manual filing of appeal on 02.05.2016, there is no delay at all. Hence, the CIT(Appeals) ought to have disposed of the appeal on merit. In view of the above, we are unable to uphold the orders of the authorities below. Accordingly, orders of both the authorities below are set aside and the entire issue is remitted back to the file of the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) shall consider the appeal on merit and dispose the same in accordance with law, after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee.”
Since the facts are identical, following the above said order of the Tribunal, I set aside the order passed by Ld CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file with the direction to dispose of the appeal on merits, after affording adequate opportunity to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 5th November, 2019.