Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘A’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY & SHRI S. JAYARAMAN
आदेश / O R D E R PER SHRI DUVVURU R.L. REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
The assessee filed this appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-14, Chennai, in dated 28.02.2019 for the AY 2013-14 besides challenging the issue on merit, the assessee has mainly challenged the ex-parte order passed by the Ld.CIT(A).
Brief facts of the case of the assessee are that the assessee derives income from the business of manufacture of pharmaceutical products.
The return of income for the AY 2013-14 was filed on 25.09.2013 admitting a taxable income of Rs.2,51,78,890/- and a revised return was filed on 30.11.2012 admitting taxable income of Rs.2,51,78,890/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s.143(2) dated 02.09.2014 followed by notice u/s.142(1) dated 22.07.2015 along with the questionnaire were issued and duly served on the assessee. After considering the information given during the assessment proceedings and submissions made by the Ld.AR, the assessment was completed and assessed at a total income of Rs.4,06,19,840/-.
Aggrieved by the assessee, the assessee preferred an appeal before the Ld.CIT(A). Since the assessee could not e-file the appeal, the Ld.CIT(A) dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee.
On being aggrieved, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
The counsel for the assessee has submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) has erroneously dismissed the appeal summarily without going into the merits of the facts and without appreciating the fact that the assessee has filed manual appeal within the time stipulated under the Act, besides e-filing of the appeal immediately. He further submitted that suitable directions may be given to the Ld.CIT(A) to adjudicate the issue on merits by giving an opportunity to the assessee.
Per contra, the Ld.DR referred to the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and submitted that the assessee has failed to file the appeal electronically which is mandated by the amendment to Rule 45 of the IT Rules modified by the CBDT vide notification No.S.O.637(E) dated 01.03.2016, the manual appeal filed has been rightly treated by the Ld.CIT(A) as non-est.
We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through the orders of authorities below.
It is an admitted fact that against the Assessment Order, the assessee filed a manual appeal on 29.04.2016 which is well within the time provided under the Act. Since the assessee did not comply with Rule 45 of the IT Rules which mandates compulsory e-filing of appeals before the Ld.CIT(A) w.e.f. 01.03.2016 in respect of persons who are required to furnish return of income electronically and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee manually. It was the submission of the assessee that the assessee firm had filed its appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) manually on 29.04.2016 which was within the due date of filing of the appeal and followed up with e-filing appeal online on 07.06.2016. There was a small delay in e-filing of the appeal, therefore, the Ld.CIT(A) erroneously dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee. He was further submitted that on similar facts and circumstances in an identical issue the Mumbai Bench of this Tribunal in the case of All India Federation of Tax Practitioners v.
ITO reported in [2016] 166 DTR 276 (Mumbai Trib.) as also the decision of the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Shri Gurinder Singh Dhillon v. ITO in dated 19.04.2017 had held that the delay was liable to be condoned. Apart from this, we have perused the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Shyamalal Murari & Others reported in AIR 1976 (SC) 1177 saying that the delay in e-filing of the appeal is condoned and the issues in this appeal are restored to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits in accordance with law by allowing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
Thus, respectfully following the principles laid down by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of State of Punjab v. Shyamalal Murari & Others, referred to supra, we are of the view that this is a fit case to restore to the file of the Ld.CIT(A) for adjudication on merits in accordance with law by allowing an opportunity of being heard to the assessee.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 06th day of September, 2019, in Chennai.