SUBHASH V. KUBAL,MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER 25 (3) (4), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6760/MUM/2017Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai12 February 2018AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the assessee: the assessee's appeal was allowed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal due to technical reasons and found no merit in rejecting the appeal on the basis of manual filing. The appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee filed an appeal manually due to technical difficulties with the e-filing portal. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal solely on the grounds that it was not filed online, without considering the merits. Subsequently, the assessee filed an e-appeal for regularization.

What were the issues?

Whether an appeal filed manually due to technical glitches in the e-filing system can be dismissed without considering its merits. The procedural requirement of filing an appeal online versus the substantive issue of appeal maintainability.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC”, BENCH MUMBAI

Before: SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM Shri Subhash V Kubal

For Appellant: Shri Anant N Pai
For Respondent: Ms. N. Hemalatha
Hearing: 07/02/2018Pronounced: 12/02/2018

आदेश / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):

1.

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the ex-parte order of CIT(A)-37, Mumbai dated 03/10/2017 for A.Y.2010-11 in the matter of order passed u/s.143(3)/ 147 of the IT Act.

2.

Rival contentions have been heard and record perused.

3.

In this case, CIT(A) has dismissed assessee’s appeal merely on the plea that under Rule 45, assessee should have filed the appeal online. However, since the assessee has not filed online appeal, the same was dismissed by the CIT(A) without going on merits of the case. From the Shri Subhash V Kubal record we found that assessee has filed the appeal on 25/04/2016 manually as there were technical difficulties with the Government software for filing e-appeals (see CBDT circular no 20 of 2016 – para 3.4 of CIT(A)’s order – this Circular recognises technical hitches in the e-filing on 26/05/2016. CBDT Circular extending dates for e-filing to 15/06/2016 including e-filing of manually filed appeals earlier. Assessee was not aware of this circular and did not file his appeal on line to regularise his earlier manually filed appeal.

4.

CIT(A)-37 issued notice for hearing for 25/09/2017. This notice also sought explanation for appeal filed manually. No defect memo or show cause issued earlier. Thereafter on 25/09/2017 assessee filed e-appeal for regularisation of his manual appeal. The e-appeal also contained plea of condonation of delay in item No.15 of Form 35 filed on line. Assessee also filed in CIT(A)’s office informing him about online appeal so filed and cited technical difficulties faced by the assessee for filing e-appeal in April 2016 for which reason the appeal was filed manually as due date was nearing. However, CIT(A) passed order rejecting manually filed appeal as non-maintanable as e-appeal not filed before extended date of 15/06/2015. The order did not even refer to the online appeal filed on 25/09/2017.

5.

In view of the above, we condone the delay in filing appeal due to technical reasons and do not find any merit for rejection of the assessee’s appeal merely on the plea that it was not e-filed whereas subsequently assessee has filed the appeal in the prescribed form of e-

More judgments on Section 147

All 49,210 judgments and leading authorities on Section 147 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →