Smt. Subramani Prabha, CHENNAI V. ACIT, CHENNAI

ITA 1138/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2020] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9361 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 10 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 02-01-2020
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 22-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N ARJUN RAJ C A SHRI S SRIDHAR
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . !, # !$ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.1138/CHNY/2019 & '& / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 SMT. SUBRAMANI PRABHA, NO.1, MAIN LINK ROAD, CBI COLONY, PERUNGUDI, CHENNAI - 600 096. PAN : AOVPP 2099 D V. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, NON-CORPORATE CIRCLE 15(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. ()*/ APPELLANT) (+,)*/ RESPONDENT) )* - . / APPELLANT BY : SHRI N. ARJUN RAJ, CA FOR SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE +,)* - . / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, JCIT / - 0# / DATE OF HEARING : 27.11.2019 12' - 0# / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 02.01.2020 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -15, CHENNAI, DATED 30.01.2019 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. SHRI N. ARJUN RAJ, THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR TH E ASSESSEE, SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED THE APPEAL MANUAL LY ON 22.04.2016. 2 I.T.A. NO.1138/CHNY/19 THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED APPEAL ON-LINE ON 01.07.201 9. ACCORDING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, THE CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THAT THE APPEAL HAS TO BE E-FILED MANDATORILY WITH EFFECT FROM 01.03.2016. ACCORDING LY, HE FOUND THAT THERE WAS A DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. THEREFORE, ACCOR DING TO THE LD. COUNSEL, WITHOUT GOING INTO THE MERIT OF THE APPEAL, THE SAM E WAS REJECTED IN LIMINE . 3. WE HEARD SHRI AR.V. SREENIVASAN, THE LD. DEPARTM ENTAL REPRESENTATIVE ALSO. ACCORDING TO THE LD. D.R., IT IS A MANDATORY REQUIREMENT OF LAW TO E-FILE THE APPEAL WITH EFFECT FROM 01.03.2016. ADMITTEDLY, THE APPEAL WAS FILED ONLY ON 01.07.2019 , AFTER THE DISMISSAL OF APPEAL BY CIT(APPEALS). SINCE THERE WAS NO EXPL ANATION FORTHCOMING FROM THE ASSESSEE FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL, ACCORD ING TO THE LD. D.R., THE SAME WAS REJECTED. 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD. REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE ASSE SSEE AND THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT THE APPEAL WAS MANUA LLY FILED ON 22.04.2016. THE APPEAL WAS E-FILED ON 01.07.2019. IN THE MEANTIME, THE APPEAL FILED MANUALLY ON 22.04.2016 WAS DISMISSED. DURING THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM MANUAL FILING OF APPEAL TO E -FILING,THE ASSESSEE WAS CONFUSED. THE APPELLATE REMEDY PROVIDED UNDER THE SCHEME OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT CANNOT BE BRUSHED ASIDE MERELY BECAU SE THERE WAS A TECHNICAL BREACH IN THE PROCEDURE OF FILING THE APP EAL. THE CBDT OUGHT 3 I.T.A. NO.1138/CHNY/19 TO HAVE PROVIDED SUFFICIENT TIME FOR SWITCH OVER TO E-FILING OF APPEAL. MOREOVER, WHEN TECHNICALITY AND SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE ARE PITTED AGAINST EACH OTHER, THE SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE HAS TO BE PREFE RRED. THIS BEING A PROCEEDING UNDER THE INCOME-TAX ACT FOR COMPUTING T HE TAXABLE INCOME, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE APPEAL E-FILED ON 01.07.2019 HAS TO BE DISPOSED OF ON MERIT. ACCORDI NGLY, THE DELAY IN E- FILING THE APPEAL IS CONDONED AND THE IMPUGNED ORDE R OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IS SET ASIDE. THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL CONSIDER THE APPEAL E-FILED ON 01.07.2019 ON MERIT AND DISPOSE THE SAME IN ACCORDA NCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 2 ND JANUARY, 2020 AT CHENNAI. SD /- SD/- (. !) ( . . . ) (S. JAYARAMAN) (N.R.S. GANESAN) # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 4 /DATED, THE 2 ND JANUARY, 2020. KRI. 4 I.T.A. NO.1138/CHNY/19 - +056 76'0 /COPY TO: 1. )*/ APPELLANT 2. +,)*/ RESPONDENT 3. / 80 () /CIT(A)-15, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT-6, CHENNAI 5. 69 +0 /DR 6. :& ; /GF.