M/S. DEEPAM CONSTRUCTION, CHENNAI V. ITO, NCW - 15 (1), CHENNAI

ITA 2309/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1814 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-12-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 13-08-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A SUNDARARAJAN
• Assessee Lawyers: N DEVANATHAN
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , ! ' , $ '% BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.2309/CHNY/2019 ( )( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 M/S DEEPAM CONSTRUCTION, NO.4 & 5, 9 TH CROSS STREET, CUSTOM COLONY, THORAIPAKKAM, CHENNAI - 600 097. PAN : AAIFD 3828 M V. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON CORPORATE WARD - 15(1), CHENNAI - 600 034. (+,/ APPELLANT) (-.+,/ RESPONDENT) +, / 0 / APPELLANT BY : SH. N. DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE -.+, / 0 / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI A. SUNDARARAJAN, ADDL. CI T 1 / 2$ / DATE OF HEARING : 25.10.2019 34) / 2$ / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.12.2019 / O R D E R PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) -15, CHENN AI, DATED 26.06.2019 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2013-14. 2. THE APPLICATION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR EARLY HEARING WAS POSTED ON 25 TH OCTOBER, 2019. WHEN THE APPEAL FOR EARLY HEARING WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING, SH. N. DEVANATHAN, THE LD .COUNSEL FOR THE 2 I.T.A. NO.2309/CHNY/19 ASSESSEE AND SHRI A. SUNDARARAJAN, THE LD. DEPARTME NTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION ON MERIT IN THE APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO DELAY IN E-FILING OF APPEAL. IT WAS ALSO CLARIFIED THAT THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL MANUALLY ON 07.04.2016. HOWEVER, AS PER THE MANDAT E OF INCOME- TAX ACT, THE APPEAL WAS FILED ELECTRONICALLY ON 07. 02.2019. THEREFORE, THE CIT(APPEALS) HAS TREATED THE DELAY I N FILING THE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL. 3. REFERRING TO THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN SHRI G.P. SARAVANAN V. ITO IN I.T.A. NO.279/CHNY/2019 DATED 10.05.2019, THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT IN A SIMILAR CIRCUM STANCES, THIS TRIBUNAL FOUND THAT E-FILING OF APPEAL SUBSEQUENTLY RELATES BACK TO MANUAL FILING OF APPEAL, THEREFORE, THERE WAS NO DE LAY AT ALL. 4. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FACTUAL SITUATION, BY CONSE NT OF THE BOTH THE PARTIES, THE APPEAL ITSELF WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEA RING. AS RIGHTLY SUBMITTED BY THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE, THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI G.P. SARAVANAN (SUPRA), HAS PASSED AN ORDER WHICH READS AS FOLLOWS:- 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT THE APPEAL WAS M ANUALLY 3 I.T.A. NO.2309/CHNY/19 FILED ON 02.05.2016. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE TH AT ANY DEFECT MEMO WAS ISSUED OR THE APPEAL WAS RETURN ED. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MANUALLY, IF IT IS NOT IN TUNE WITH THE STATUTORY REQUIREMENT, IT IS F OR THE CIT(APPEALS) EITHER TO ISSUE A DEFECT MEMO OR TO RE TURN THE APPEAL FILED MANUALLY, TO THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY , NO SUCH ACTION WAS TAKEN BY THE CIT(APPEALS). THE APPEAL W AS E- FILED ON 22.12.2018. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE ADMITTEDL Y FILED THE APPEAL MANUALLY ON 02.05.2016 AND ALSO E-FILED ON 22.12.2018, THE ASSESSEES E-FILING OF APPEAL WOULD RELAT E BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DATE OF FILING APPEAL MANUALLY ON 02.05.2016. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS NO DELAY IN FILING T HE APPEAL. IF E-FILING OF APPEAL ON 22.12.2018 RELATES BACK TO MANUAL FILING OF APPEAL ON 02.05.2016, THERE IS NO DELAY A T ALL. HENCE, THE CIT(APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE DISPOS ED OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE UNAB LE TO UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW. ACCORD INGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL CONSIDER THE APPEAL ON MERIT AND DISPOSE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LA W, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 5. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL, WHE N THE ASSESSEE ADMITTEDLY FILED APPEAL MANUALLY ON 07.04. 2016 AND ALSO FILED ELECTRONICALLY ON 07.02.2019 AND ADMITTEDLY T HE CIT(APPEALS) HAS NOT ISSUED ANY DEFECT MEMO, THE APPEAL FILED EL ECTRONICALLY ON 07.02.2019 WOULD RELATE BACK TO THE DATE OF ORIGINA LLY FILED THE APPEAL MANUALLY ON 07.04.2016. THEREFORE, THERE WA S NO DELAY AT ALL. HENCE, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS) IS SET A SIDE AND THE ENTIRE ISSUE RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IS REMITTED BACK TO TH E FILE OF THE 4 I.T.A. NO.2309/CHNY/19 CIT(APPEALS). THE CIT(APPEALS) SHALL CONSIDER THE APPEAL ON MERIT AND DISPOSE THE SAME IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONABLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 4 TH DECEMBER, 2019 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ' ) ( . . . ) (INTURI RAMA RAO) (N.R.S. GANESAN) $ / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 6 /DATED, THE 4 TH DECEMBER, 2019. KRI. / -278 98)2 /COPY TO: 1. +, /APPELLANT 2. -.+, /RESPONDENT 3. 1 :2 () /CIT(A)-15, CHENNAI 4. PRINCIPAL CIT- 6, CHENNAI 5. 8; -2 /DR 6. <( = /GF.