IDOL HOME MAKERS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 10(1)(2), MUMBAI

Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) Per Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year [AY] 2008-09 contest the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals)-17, Mumbai [CIT(A)], Appeal No. CIT(A)-17/IT-111/16-17 dated 21/11/2017 on certain grounds of appeal, the perusal of which reveal that the assessee is aggrieved by dismissal of appeal on technical grounds.

2. None has appeared for assessee and no valid adjournment application is on record. Left with no option, we proceed to dispose-off the same on the basis of material on record and after hearing Ld. Departmental Representative [DR] who submitted that the appeal before Ld. CIT(A) was not e-filed as required by extant rules and therefore, the same has rightly been dismissed.

3. Upon careful consideration, we find that the assessee has been assessed on 17/03/2016 u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 wherein the assessee was saddled with addition of Rs.4 Crores on account of alleged bogus share capital & another addition of Rs.6,000/- on account of commission on alleged sham transactions. 4. Aggrieved, the assessee preferred appeal against the same before Ld. CIT(A) on 21/04/2016 manually in paper-form. However, 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 be filed digitally in electronic form up-to extended period of 15/06/2016. The said fact was brought to the notice of assessee vide letter dated 16/10/2017 which was not responded to. Resultantly, the appeal was treated as non-maintainable and inadmissible. A liberty was given to the assessee to file the appeal in electronic form and seek condonation of delay. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 5. Upon careful consideration, we find that the appeal was filed by the assessee, though in paper form, within stipulated time period. 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 otherwise valid appeal. It is also noted that the in the initial stages of electronic filing of appeal, the possibility of technical glitches could not be ruled out. Therefore, we deem it fit to direct the assessee to e-file the appeal in the prescribed manner before Ld. first appellate authority within 15 days from the date of receipt of this order. The appeal, so filed, shall be treated to have been filed in time. The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to adjudicate the same on merits after affording due opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Needles to add that, failure to e-file the appeal as directed by us here-in-above shall result into confirmation of stand of Ld. CIT(A). 6. The appeal stands allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 24th April, 2019.

Sd/ Sd/ Sd/- Sd/ Sd/ Sd/- Sd/ Sd/ (C.N. Prasad C.N. Prasad C.N. Prasad) C.N. Prasad (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) (Manoj Kumar Aggarwal) �याियक सदःय / / / / Judicial Member Judicial Member लेखा सदःय / / / / Accountant Member Judicial Member Judicial Member Accountant Member Accountant Member Accountant Member मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 24/04/2019 Sr.PS, Jaisy Varghese आदेशक�ूितिल�पअमे�षत आदेशक�ूितिल�पअमे�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to आदेशक�ूितिल�पअमे�षत आदेशक�ूितिल�पअमे�षत Copy of the Order forwarded to Copy of the Order forwarded to : Copy of the Order forwarded to 1. अपीलाथ�/ The Appellant 2. ू�यथ�/ The Respondent 3. आयकरआयु�(अपील) / The CIT(A) 4. आयकरआयु�/ CIT– concerned 5. �वभागीयूितिनिध, आयकरअपीलीयअिधकरण, मुंबई/ DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड�फाईल / Guard File