What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal found that the assessees had also filed e-filing acknowledgments and that this was the first year of mandatory e-filing. Therefore, the appeals were restored to the CIT(A) for adjudication on merits.

The assessees filed their appeals manually before the CIT(A) instead of electronically, which was mandated from March 1, 2016. The CIT(A) treated these appeals as non-est and dismissed them.

What were the issues?

Whether manual filing of appeal before CIT(A) is valid when e-filing is mandated. Whether the appeals should be adjudicated on merits despite procedural defect.

Rohan Kapur vs ITO | ITAT Kolkata 2019

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “SMC” KOLKATA

Before: Shri S.S, Godara

आदेश /O R D E R These three assessees’ appeal(s) for assessment year 2014-15 in first and last cases and assessment year 2009-10 in second one; arise against the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata’s separate orders; all dated 20.06.2018 passed in case Nos.291,290 & 289/CIT(A)-9/Wd-32(4)/32(3)/2016-17/Kol respectively involving proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961; in short ‘the Act’. Heard all the assessees as well as the learned Addl. CIT-DR reiterating their respective stands against and in support of both the lower authorities’ action. Case files perused.

It emerges at the outset that the CIT(A)’s identical lower appellate discussion forming subject-matter of challenge in all these three cases reads as under:- “3. "नणेय/Decision Rule 45 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, mandates compulsory e-filing of appeals before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) with effect from 01/03/2016 in respect of persons who are required to furnish return of income electronically. Vide Circular No.20/2016 dated 26/05/20116 issued vide F.No.279/Misc/M-54/2016/ITJ, the time limit for compulsorily e-fling of appeals was extended till 15/06/2016, beyond which the appeals before Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) are to be filed mandatorily by e-filing mode in respect of persons who are required to furnish return of income electronically. It is seen that appellant has not filed appeal electronically and has only filed it manually. The appeal filed is thus non-est and cannot be acted upon and is therefore treated as dismissed.”

It is therefore clear that the CIT(A)’s sole reason for not entertaining all the lower appeals is that they had not filed their respective cases electronically but only manually. Learned Addl. CIT-DR fails to dispute this clinching position. Mr. Agarwal has placed before me the assessee’s respective acknowledgement forms; all dated

ROHAN KAPUR,KOLKATA vs. ITO, WARD - 32(4), KOLKATA, KOLKATA

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