What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that justice should not be sacrificed for hypertechnicality, especially in the first year of a new filing procedure. Therefore, the appeal was remitted back to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) which was dismissed in limine because it was not filed electronically as mandated. The assessee contended that this was the first year of the electronic filing requirement and faced technical glitches.

What were the issues?

Whether the CIT(A) was justified in dismissing the appeal solely on the technical ground of non-electronic filing, without adjudicating the merits, especially considering it was the first year of the electronic filing mandate.

Suresh Kishanchand Changwani vs ACIT | ITAT Mumbai 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” Bench, Mumbai

Before: Shri Shamim Yahya (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Suresh Otwani

For Respondent: Shri Chaitanya Anjaria

Hearing: 4.7.2019Pronounced: 20.8.2019

This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT(A) dated 31.3.2018 and pertains to A.Y. 2014-15.

The preliminary issue raised is that learned CIT-A erred in dismissing the appeal in limine on the technical ground that the appeal was not filed electronically.

Brief facts of the case are that pursuant to the assessment order assessee filed appeal before the learned CIT(A). Learned CIT(A) noted that pursuant to the directions in this regard, from the current assessment year the appeal before the learned CIT-A was to be filed in electronic mode. The learned CIT-A noted that since it was mandatory for the assessee to file appeal electronically, he dismissed the appeal in limine on the technical ground.

Against this order assessee is in appeal before ITAT.

I have heard both the counsel and perused the records. I find that in the present case the learned CIT-A has not adjudicated the appeal filed before him.

2 Suresh Kishanchand Changwani He has dismissed the same as unadmitted on the ground that the assessee was required file the appeal electronically. Since it was not so done the learned CIT-A dismissed the appeal. It is the plea of the assessee that this was the first year when it was required that the appeal should be filed electronically. It is prayed that there were some technical glitches and accordingly it is prayed that the appeal should be admitted and proper order on the adjudication of the same should be given. It is also submitted that later on appeal was also filed electronically.

Up on careful consideration I find that the assessee's plea is that it was the first year of the requirement of the appeal to be filed electronically and there were some technical glitches. It is prayed that in the interest of justice the appeal should be adjudicated on merits. This in our considered opinion deserves proper consideration. I note that it is settled law that in the web of hypertechnicality justice should not take a backseat. Accordingly I remit the issue to the file of learned CIT-A. Learned CIT-A directed to consider the issues raised on merits and pass by speaking order after giving proper notice to the assessee.

In the result assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes. Order has been pronounced in the Court on 20.8.2019.

SURESH KISHANCHAND CHANGWANI,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 23(3), MUMBAI

What did the Tribunal hold?

What were the facts?

What were the issues?

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Recent GST High Court judgments