Shri Sanjeev Kumar, Batala V. DCIT, International Taxation, Circle, Chandigarh

ITA 1569/CHANDI/2019

AI Insights

The case involves an appeal by Shri Sanjeev Kumar Berian against the order of the CIT(A)-43, New Delhi, which pertained to the assessment year 2011-12. The primary contention was the dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) in limine due to non-compliance with the electronic filing requirement as prescribed under Rule 12(3) of the Income Tax Rules. The assessee argued that the dismissal was a technical breach and sought an opportunity to rectify the filing method. The Tribunal referenced a similar case (Mr. Umesh A Mishra Vs. ITO) to emphasize that procedural rules should not stifle justice and that a liberal approach should be taken to allow the assessee to present his case on merits.

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 127730 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 14-03-2023
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 09-12-2019
• Other Referred Cases: Mr. Umesh A Mishra Vs. ITO (in ITA No. 1936/Mum/2018)
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Unexplained expenditure
• Section: 68; 271(1)(c); 234B

Judgement Text

आयकर अपील य अ धकरण,च डीगढ़ यायपीठ “बी” , च डीगढ़ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH “B”, CHANDIGARH ी आकाश द प जैन, उपा य एवं ी $व%म 'संह यादव, लेखा सद,य BEFORE: SHRI. AAKASH DEEP JAIN, VP & SHRI. VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, AM ITA NO. 1569/Chd/ 2019 Assessment Year : 2011-12 Shri Sanjeev Kumar Berian Mohalla, Bedian Chowk, Batala, Gurdaspur, PUnjab The DCIT Circle (International Taxation) Chandigarh PAN NO: BLSPK6709G Appellant Respondent ! " Assessee by : Shri Parikshit Aggarwal, CA # ! " Revenue by : Shri Akashdeep, JCIT, Sr. DR $ % ! & Date of Hearing : 15/03/2023 '()* ! & Date of Pronouncement : 16/03/2023 आदेश/Order PER VIKRAM SINGH YADAV, A.M. : This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)- 43, New Delhi dt. 30/09/2019 pertaining to A.Y. 2011-12 wherein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal : 1. That the order of The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) is defective both in Law and Facts of the case. 2. That the order of The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) has not been justified in making additions of cash deposits amounting to Rs. 48,14,200/- as unexplained expenditure u/s 68 of the Income Tax Act in the assessment order. 3. That the order of The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) has not been justified in raising demand of tax of Rs. 36,57,420/- against additions made by him u/s 68 of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. That the order of The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) has not been justified in charging interest under section 234A 234B and 234C of The Income Tax Act, 1961. 2 5. That the order of The Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) has not been justified in initiating the penalty proceedings u/s 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 6. That any other ground which may be taken up at the time of hearing with the kind permission. 2. During the course of hearing, the Ld. AR submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine for the reason that the assessee has filed the appeal manually and not electronically as prescribed under Rule 12(3) of the Income Tax Rules. It was submitted that it is not in dispute that the assessee has manually filed the appeal in time and on account of technical reason that the appeal was supposed to be filed electronically and not manually, the Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the appeal in limine without deciding the matter on merits of the case. It was submitted that it was purely a technical breach and the assessee deserves to be heard on merits of the case and it was accordingly submitted that the assessee be allowed an opportunity to file the appeal electronically before the Ld. CIT(A) in the interest of justice and the matter be heard on merits of the case. In support, reliance was placed on the decision of Coordinate Mumbai Benches in case of Mr. Umesh A Mishra Vs. ITO (in ITA No. 1936/Mum/2018). 3. Per contra, the Ld. DR has relied on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) and submitted that the Rules were amended way back in 2016 and the appeal was filed in 2019 and therefore the Rules were very much in existence for electronically filing of the appeal and therefore where the assessee has failed to electronically filed the appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) has rightly dismissed the appeal in limine. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on the record. We find that it is only the mode of filing the appeal which has been disputed by the Ld. CIT(A) wherein the assessee has filed the appeal 3 manually whereas the Rules required the appeal to be filed electronically. There is no other defect which has been pointed out by the Ld. CIT(A). No doubt the Rules have been amended to provide for electronically filing the appeal, however before dismissing the appeal of the assessee, the Ld. CIT(A) should have atleast allowed an opportunity to the assessee to remove the defect on account of manual filing of the appeal and to allow the assessee to file the appeal electronically which has apparently not happened in the instant case as no such opportunity was provided by the assessee to remove the defect. We find that under similar circumstances, the Coordinate Mumbai Bench in case of Mr. Umesh A Mishra Vs. ITO (supra) has granted liberty to the assessee to file its appeal electronically before the Ld. CIT(A) holding that the liberal approach is required to be taken to advance justice as the procedure are handmade to advance justice and the relevant findings reads as under: “6.3. We have observed that that newly introduced system of e-filing of appeals before learned CIT(A) was introduced w.e.f. 01.03.2016 vide Rule 45 of the 1962 Rules while assessee filed his appeal with Ld. CIT(A) on 12.04.2016. Thus it can be seen that it was an initial period of introduction of new system of filing of appeal before learned CIT(A) electronically. The assessee has claimed that he was not aware of new system of e-filing of appeals before learned CIT(A) and hence he could not e-File his appeal with the Ld. CIT(A) . However, the assessee filed an appeal with learned CIT(A) on 12.04.2016 within time prescribed u/s 249(2) but the same was filed manually. The appeal was dismissed by Ld. CIT(A) on this short ground only without adjudicating issues on merits. In our considered view , there is no quarrel that the tax-payers are bound to follow procedures prescribed by authorities in fulfilling their obligations under the 1961 Act read with 1962 Rules otherwise there will be breakdown of Rule of Law. It is well settled that Rule of Law is engrained in basic structure of our constitution. But at the same time procedures are meant to advance justice and not to stifle the same. The new system of e-filing of appeals before learned CIT(A) were introduced by Revenue only wef 01.03.2016 and the assessee filed his appeal before learned CIT(A) on 12.04.2016 manually but the said appeal was filed within time limit prescribed u/s 249(2) of the 1961 Act. The CBDT extended deadline for efiling of appeal before learned CIT(A) to 15.06.2016 , vide circular 20 of 2016 dated 26.05.2016. The assessee still did not e-filed its appeal before learned CIT(A). It is claimed that the assessee was not aware of the amended procedure for e-filing of appeals. The learned CIT(A) dismissed assessee’s appeal on this short ground of not filing of appeal electronically . The learned CIT(A) did not decide any issue raised by the assessee in his appeals on merits. Under these facts and circumstances of the case , we are of the considered view that liberal approach is required to be taken to advance justice as the procedure are handmade to advance justice. When technicalities are pitted against justice, the courts will lean towards advancement of justice. It could not be shown by Revenue that the assessee acted in defiance of law 4 deliberately . Thus, we are setting aside all the issue’s arising in this appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate all the issue’s raised by assessee on merits in accordance with law. The assessee is hereby directed as well given liberty to e-file its appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) within 10 days of receipt of this order . The Ld. CIT(A) is directed to admit and adjudicate the issues raised by the assessee in its appeal on merits in accordance with law. Thus, with these directions , we are restoring the matter back to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for re-adjudication of all the issues as are arising in appeal of the assessee on merits in accordance with law after providing opportunity of heard to the assessee. The evidences/explanations filed by the assessee shall be admitted by learned CIT(A) and shall be adjudicated in accordance with law on merits . The appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. We order accordingly. 5. In the light of above, the assessee is hereby allowed to file its appeal electronically before the ld CIT(A) within four weeks of this order and the ld. CIT(A) is hereby directed to admit the appeal so filed electronically by the assesseee and adjudicate the issue raised by the assessee in its appeal on merits in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 6. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open Court on 16/03/2023. Sd/- Sd/- आकाश द प जैन $व%म 'संह यादव (AAKASH DEEP JAIN) ( VIKRAM SINGH YADAV) उपा य / VICE PRESIDENT लेखा सद,य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AG Date: 16/03/2023 ( + ! , - . - Copy of the order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. $ / CIT 4. $ / 0 1 The CIT(A) 5. - 2 ग 4 5 & 4 5 678 ग9 DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. ग 8 : % Guard File ( + $ By order, ; # Assistant Registrar