Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”, NEW DELHI
Before: SHRI H.S. SIDHU & SHRI L.P. SAHU
Date of Hearing : Date of Hearing : 07 Date of Hearing : Date of Hearing : 07 07-09-201 07 201 2016 201 Date of Order : Date of Order : 14-09-201 Date of Order : Date of Order : 201 2016 201
ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER PER H.S. SIDHU PER PER H.S. SIDHU H.S. SIDHU : : : : JM H.S. SIDHU The Revenue has filed this Appeal against the Order dated 27.12.2012 passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Faridabad relevant to assessment year 2007-08.
At the time of filing the Appeal the Defect Notice dated 28.5.2013 was issued to the Department stating that original grounds of appeal in Form 36 before the ITAT are not filed. In response thereto, Sh. Amitabh Kumar, ITO, Ward-II(1), Faridabad sent a communication dated 2.7.2013 stating therein that the original grounds of appeal have already been filed before the ITAT on 4.3.2013 in the case of M/s Industrial Syndicate, Plot No. 371, Sector-24, Faridabad Appeal No. 1215/Del/2013-Asstt. Year 2007-08.
After going through the records, we note that this case came up for hearing many times and we find that the grounds of appeal raised by the Department have not been filed before the Tribunal at the time of filing of appeal and also not rectified the defect, as per law till date.
4. We further note that the Ld. CIT, Faridabad vide her order 28.2.2013 passed u/s. 253(2) of the I.T. Act has directed the ITO, Ward II(1), Faridabad to file the Appeal before the ITAT, Delhi against the order dated 27.12.2012 passed by the Ld. CIT(A)-Faridabad, but the then ITO, Ward II(1), Faridabad Sh.
TD Gulati has not applied his mind while filing the present appeal before the Tribunal and he filed the Form No. 36 without any grounds. However, he has enclosed the Additional Information Sheet with Annexure-A containing the Facts and Grounds signed by CIT, Faridabad, Ms. Neena Kumar which is contrary to the law. Therefore, the present Appeal is defective and is not maintainable in the eyes of law.
In the background of the aforesaid discussions, we dismiss the present appeal filed by the Revenue, being ‘Defective’. But in the interest of justice, we are giving the liberty to the Revenue to file the Application for recall of this order, as per Rules, after rectifying the defect. 2
In the result, the Appeal filed by the Revenue stands dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 14/09/2016.