Shri.Tejraj Gulecha , Bangalore V. Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax Circle-7(2)(1), Bangalore

ITA 195/BANG/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 121 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4746 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 01-06-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: DR SANDEEP GOEL BENGALURU
• Assessee Lawyers: MURALIDHAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Reasonable cause

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 195/BANG/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013 - 14 SHRI TEJRAJ GULECHA, NO.41/A, CLASSICS ORCHARDS, MEENAKSHI TEMPLE, BANNERGHATTA ROAD, BANGALORE 560 029. PAN: ABPPG 1673B VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 7(2)(1), BANGALORE. APP ELL ANT RESPONDENT A PP EL LANT BY : SHRI MURALIDHAR, ADVOCATE RE SPONDENT BY : DR. SANDEEP GOEL , ADDL. CIT(DR)(ITAT), BENGALURU. DATE OF HEARING : 2 2 . 0 5 .201 8 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 01.06. 201 8 O R D E R PER N.V. VASUDEVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS AGAINST THE ORDER DATED 26.12.2017 OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-7, BENGALURU RELATING TO ASSESS MENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE ASSESSEE IS AN INDIVIDUAL, WHO DERIVES INC OME FROM SALARY, INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY, INCOME FROM BUSINESS AN D INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES. FOR THE AY 2013-14, THE ASSESSEE FILED RE TURN OF INCOME DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.1,96,75,546. THE ORDE R OF ASSESSMENT DATED 30.3.2016 WAS PASSED BY THE AO DETERMINING TOTAL IN COME OF RS.2,01,19,080 BY MAKING AN ADDITION OF RS.4,43,534 TO THE TOTAL INCOME ITA NO. 195/BANG/2018 PAGE 2 OF 4 CONSEQUENT TO DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION ON ACCOUNT OF LOAN PROCESSING FEE WHILE COMPUTING THE INCOME UNDER THE HEAD INCOME F ROM OTHER SOURCES AS FOLLOWS:- TOTAL INCOME AS PER RETURN : RS. 1,96,75,546 ADD: ADDITIONS AS DISCUSSED ABOVE: RS. 4,43 ,534 ----------------------- ASSESSED INCOME RS. 2,01,19,080 ------------------------ 3. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ADDITION, THE ASSESSE E PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(APPEALS). THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ON 02.5.2016 MANUALLY. WITH EFFECT FR OM 01.3.2016, PERSONS WHO ARE REQUIRED TO FURNISH RETURN OF INCOME ELECTR ONICALLY SHOULD ALSO FILE APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC FORM. THIS IS AS PER RULE 45 OF THE INCOME-TAX RULES, 1962. SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED APPEAL MANUALLY , THE CIT(A) ISSUED LETTERS DATED 01.12.16 & 06.09.17 CALLING UPON THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC FORM. THERE WAS NO RESPONSE TO THESE LETTERS OF THE CIT(A) FROM THE ASSESSEE. THE APPEAL WAS FIXED FOR HEARING ON 22.12.17. EVEN ON THAT DATE, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE A SSESSEE. THE CIT(A) WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS IT WAS NOT PRESENTED IN PROPER FORM. ACCORDINGLY, THE APPEAL WAS TREATED AS INVALID AND DISMISSED BY THE CIT(APPEALS). 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS), THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED THE PRESENT APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. TODAY, WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE A SSESSEE FILED BEFORE US THE EVIDENCE OF THE ASSESSEE HAVING FILED THE APPEA L IN ELECTRONIC FORM. THE SAME IS PLACED ON RECORD. THE APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC FORM WAS FILED ON 19.5.2018. IN COL. 15 OF THE APPEAL FORM, THE ASSE SSEE HAS ADMITTED THAT THERE WAS A DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL IN ELECTRONI C FORM AND THE REASON FOR THE SAME WAS THAT THE APPEAL WAS FILED MANUALLY WIT HIN THE DUE DATE, BUT ITA NO. 195/BANG/2018 PAGE 3 OF 4 WAS REJECTED BY THE CIT(A) FOR THE REASON THAT IT W AS NOT FILED IN ELECTRONIC FORM. 5. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. IT IS NO D OUBT TRUE THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS GUILTY OF NOT RESPONDING TO THE NOTICE S ISSUED BY THE CIT(APPEALS) POINTING OUT THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT M AINTAINABLE FOR NOT HAVING BEEN FILED IN ELECTRONIC FORM, BUT THE FACT REMAINS THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE APPEAL IN TIME MANUALLY. IT IS ALSO SUBMITTED IN THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL THAT THE NOTICE POSTING THE CASE FOR HEARING ON 22.12.2017 WAS NOT RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE. WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT WE NEED NOT GO INTO THESE ASPECTS FOR THE REASON THAT THE APPEAL AS REQ UIRED IN LAW HAS NOW BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE I.E., ELECTRONIC FORM. W E ARE ALSO OF THE VIEW THAT THERE IS A REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE DELAY IN F ILING THE APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC FORM. WE THEREFORE DIRECT THE CIT(APPEA LS) TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ELECTRONIC FORM ON 19.05.2018 AS A VALID APPEAL AND DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS, AFTER AFFOR DING THE ASSESSEE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALL OWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 1 ST DAY OF JUNE, 2018. SD/- SD/- ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) ( N.V. VASUDEVAN ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 1 ST JUNE, 2018. / D ESAI S MURTHY / ITA NO. 195/BANG/2018 PAGE 4 OF 4 COPY TO: 1. APP ELL ANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, BANGALORE.