M/S. STANDARD INDUSTRIES LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT (OSD) , 3(3) , MUMBAI

ITA 1674/MUM/2021

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5007 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 20-07-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: H
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 21-09-2021
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, ‘H‘ BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE: SHRI M.BALAGANESH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI RAHUL CHAUDHARY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1674/Mum/2021 (Asse ssment Year :2005-06) M/s. Standard Industries Limited 59, 1 st Floor, The Arcade World Trade Centre Cuff Parade, Colaba Mumbai – 400 005 Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) 3(3) Aayakar Bhavan Mumbai- 400 020 PAN/GIR No.AABCS 8888C (Appellant) .. (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Ninad Patade Revenue by Shri Tejinder Pal Singh Date of Hearing 21/07/2022 Date of Pronouncement 21/07/2022 आदेश / O R D E R PER M. BALAGANESH (A.M): This appeal in ITA No.1674/Mum/2021 for A.Y.2005-06arises out of the order by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Indore in appeal No.IT-10005/08-09 dated 03/05/2019 (ld. CIT(A) in short) against the order of assessment passed u/s.143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 26/12/2007 by the ld. Asst. Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD) 3(3), Mumbai (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). ITA No.1674/Mum/2021 M/s. Standard Industries Ltd., 2 2. At the outset we find that there is a delay of 766 days in filing of appeal by the assessee. The assessee had filed a delay condonation petition together with an affidavit duly notorized in proper form explaining the reasons for the delay. We find from the said petition and affidavit that against the assessment framed by the ld. AO u/s.143(3) of the Act on 26/12/2007, the assessee had preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(A)-7, Mumbai on 25/01/2008 in manual form. Those days, the appeal was required to be filed before the ld. CIT(A) manually. Later, the case of the assessee was transferred from ld. CIT(A)-7 to ld.CIT(A)-8, Mumbai. The assessee has been appearing before the ld. CIT(A)-8, Mumbai on several occasions on 14/02/2018, 07/06/2018, 20/08/2018 and 06/06/2019. On 15/06/2019, the assessee received the appellate order dated 03/05/2019 from ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore dismissing the appeal filed by the assessee stating that form No.35 and supporting documents were not submitted on the portal i.e. electronically appeal had not been filed. The assessee wrote a letter to CIT(A)-II, Indore stating that the appeal jurisdiction lies with ld. CIT(A)-8, Mumbai and the case does not lie with CIT(A)-II Indore. No response was received from ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore in this regard. It is also pertinent to note that the appellate order received from ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore was unsigned as it was received by the assessee without any manual signature or digital signature. This fact has not been controverted by the Revenue before us. Later the assessee sought to settle the dispute by availing ‘Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme’ and preferred an application to the competent authority thereon. The said application was rejected by the department on the ground that no appeal is pending before the ld. CIT(A). Thereafter, the assessee decided to prefer the appeal before this Tribunal against the dismissal order of the ld. CIT(A)-II Indore. In view of the Covid-19 Pandamic, it could not be filed immediately and ultimately the appeal was filed on 22/09/2021 with a delay of 766 days. ITA No.1674/Mum/2021 M/s. Standard Industries Ltd., 3 3. None of the facts stated hereinabove was neither found to be false by the Revenue nor controverted by the Revenue. Hence, we deem it fit to condone the delay in filing of the appeal by the assessee and admit the appeal of the assessee for adjudication. 3.1. We hold that the ld. CIT(A)-II, Indore does not have jurisdiction at all over the assessee to dispose of the appeal. It is a fact on record that appeal has been filed manually by the assessee on 25/01/2008 before the ld. CIT(A), Mumbai. No finding on merits has been given by the ld. CIT(A)-Mumbai. Hence, we deem it fit and appropriate in the interest of justice and fair play to remand this appeal to the file of the ld. CIT(A)-8, Mumbai for denovo adjudication of the issues on merits in accordance with law. Accordingly, the grounds raised by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes. 4. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in open Court on 21/07/2022. Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) Sd/- (M.BALAGANESH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated 21/07/2022 KARUNA, sr.ps ITA No.1674/Mum/2021 M/s. Standard Industries Ltd., 4 Copy of the Order forwarded to : BY ORDER, (Sr. Private Secretary / Asstt. Registrar) ITAT, Mumbai Date Initial 1. Draft dictated on 21/07/2022 Sr.PS 2. Draft placed before author 21/07/2022 Sr.PS 3. Draft proposed & placed before the second member JM/AM 4. Draft discussed/approved by Second Member. JM/AM 5. Approved Draft comes to the Sr.PS/PS Sr.PS/PS 6. Kept for pronouncement on Sr.PS 7. File sent to the Bench Clerk Sr.PS 8. Date on which file goes to the AR 9. Date on which file goes to the Head Clerk. 10. Date of dispatch of Order. 11. Dictation Pad is enclosed Yes 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A), Mumbai. 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard file. //True Copy//