HARISH S DASANI,ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI vs. TDS,CPC, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, SEC-3
What did the Tribunal hold?
The Tribunal held that the manual filing was not intentional and, in the interest of natural justice, directed the assessee to file the appeal electronically. The CIT(A) was instructed to accept the electronically filed appeal and condone the delay.
What were the facts?
The assessee filed an appeal manually with a delay of 21 days due to technical issues with electronic filing. The CIT(A) condoned the delay but dismissed the appeal because it was filed manually.
What were the issues?
Whether an appeal filed manually due to technical difficulties should be dismissed, or if the assessee should be given an opportunity to refile electronically.
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCH “E”, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI B.R. BASKARAN & MS.KAVITHA RAJAGOPAL
PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER :
The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 04/10/2023 passed by CIT(A), NFAC, Delhi and it relates to the Assessment Year 2021-22. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of assessee in-limine for the reason that the said appeal was filed manually.
None appeared on behalf of the assessee. We heard ld. Departmental Representative and perused the record. We notice that the assessee was constrained to file appeal manually with a delay of 21 days and the said delay has been condoned by Ld CIT(A). On a perusal of the reasons for the delay in filing of appeal narrated by Ld CIT(A), we notice that the assessee has stated that he tried several times to file the appeal in electronic mode, but could not file due to technical problem. Hence, he filed the appeal manually by forwarding the documents by Registered Post, which resulted in a delay of 21 days. We notice that the CIT(A) has condoned the delay accepting the aforesaid explanation of the assessee.
However, the Ld CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee for the reason that the same has been filed manually. From the explanations given by the assessee for the delay in filing appeal, it can be noticed that the assessee has stated that he had tried to file appeal in electronic mode several times, but could not file the same due to technical problem. Accordingly he was constrained to file the appeal manually. It shows that the filing of appeal manually was not intentional.
Under the set of facts, in the interests of natural justice, we are of the view that the assessee may be provided with one more opportunity to present the appeal before the CIT(A) in electronic mode. Accordingly, we direct the assessee to file the appeal in electronic mode within 30 days from the date of receipt of this order. Since the delay in filing appeal in electronic mode was due to the reasons beyond the control of the assessee and since we have directed the assessee to file the appeal again before Ld CIT(A) in electronic mode, we are of the view that the delay stands explained. We direct the assessee to file a petition before Ld CIT(A) requesting him to condone the delay duly narrating the events. We also direct the CIT(A) to accept the appeal so filed electronically condoning the technical delay in filing the same.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes.
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026