MS REEMA BHATIA, Mumbai V. ITO 26(2)(5), Mumbai

ITA 1115/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6144 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 12-02-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 27-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: AMIT PRATAP SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: SAMEER SHAH
• Section: 143(3); 250

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC, BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM ITA NO. 1115/MUM/2019 ( ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09) MS. REEMA BHATIA, F LAT NO. 802, NORITA HIRANANDANI GARDEN, POWAI, MUMBAI-400076. VS. I.T.O.-26(2)(5) C-11, ROOM NO. 506, 5 TH FLOOR, PRATYASHKAR BHAVAN, BANDRA KURLA COMPLEX, BANDRA, MUMBAI-400051. PAN/GIR NO.AJAPB 6066 C (APPELLANT ) .. (RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI SAMEER SHAH (AR) REVENUE BY SHRI AMIT PRATAP SINGH (DR) DATE OF HEARING 11/02/2020 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 12/02/2020 / O R D E R PER: R.C. SHARMA, A.M. THIS IS THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-38, MUMBAI DATED 31/12/2018 FOR THE A.Y. 2008-09 IN THE MATTER OF ORDER PASSED U/S 143(3) R.W.S. 254 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT, THE ACT). 2. IN THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSEE IS BASICALLY AGGRIE VED BY THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IN DISMISSING THE ASSESSEES APPE AL ON THE PLEA THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT ELECTRONICALLY FILED THE APPEA L. ITA NO. 1115/MUM/2019 MS REEMA BHATIA VS ITO 2 3. WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITI ES BELOW AND FOUND THAT THE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE A.O., THE A SSESSEE HAS MANUALLY FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). HOWEVE R, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEES APPEAL ON THE PLEA THA T THE ASSESSEE SHOULD HAVE FILED APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY IN TERMS OF CBDT NOTIFICATION NO. 637(E) DATED 01/03/2016. WE FOUND THAT SUBSEQUE NTLY THE ASSESSEE HAS ALSO FILED APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY. HOWE VER, THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL ONLY ON THE PLEA THAT THE ASSE SSEE DID NOT FILE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY AS PER PROVISIONS OF RULE 12( 3) OF I.T. RULES. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS NOT DECIDED THE ISSUE ON MERIT. IN TERMS OF PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (6) OF SECTION 250 OF THE ACT, THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER (APPEALS) DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL SHOULD BE IN WRITING AND SHALL STATE THE POINTS FOR DETERMINATIO N, THE DECISION THEREON AND THE REASON FOR THE DECISION. WE FOUND T HAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) BOTH MANUALL Y AND ELECTRONICALLY, THEREFORE, IN THE SUBSTANTIAL INTER EST OF JUSTICE, WE RESTORE THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) F OR DECIDING THE MATTER AFRESH ON MERIT AFTER CONDONING DELAY IN FIL ING THE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY AND ALSO PROVIDING DUE AND REASONABL E OPPORTUNITY OF HEARING TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS ALSO DIREC TED TO APPEAR BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) WITHIN 60 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER. WE DIRECT ACCORDINGLY. ITA NO. 1115/MUM/2019 MS REEMA BHATIA VS ITO 3 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES ONLY. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 12 TH FEBRUARY, 2020. SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) SD/- (R.C.SHARMA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI; DATED 12/02/2020 *RANJAN COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : BY ORDER, (ASSTT. REGISTRAR) ITAT, MUMBAI 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT(A), MUMBAI. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 6. GUARD FILE. //TRUE COPY//