HANIA TRADE INVEST PVT LTD, Mumbai V. ITO 12(2)(3), Mumbai

ITA 2601/MUM/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1158 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 29-06-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: K
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 24-04-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: JATIN BASANT; FILING REVISED FORM
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “K” Bench, Mumbai Shri B.R. Baskaran (AM) & Shri Rahul Chaudhary (JM) I.T.A. No. 2601/Mum/2019 (A.Y. 2008-09) Hania Trade Invest P vt. Ltd. 402, Ak ansha, Asha Nagar Western Express Highway Kand ivali East, Mumbai 400 101. PAN : AABCH8371F V s. ITO-12(2)(3) Aaya kar Bha van M.K. Road Mumb ai-400 020. (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by Shri Jatin Basant Department by Dr.Yogesh Kamat Date of Hearin g 30.06.2022 Date of Pr on ouncem ent 30.06.2022 O R D E R Per B.R.Baskaran (AM) :- The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 22.03.2019 passed by Learned CIT(A)-20, Mumbai and it relates to the assessment year 2008-09. The assessee is aggrieved by the decision of LdCIT(A) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee in limine on the reasoning that the appeal documents have not been signed by either by the Managing Director or any other director as per requirement of sec. 140 of the Act. 2. The Ld Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the appeal documents were signed digitally by the company itself in its own name and the same was filed before Learned CIT(A) on 07-04-2016. Admittedly, the same is in contravention of sec. 140 of the Act. However, on noticing the said defect, the assessee has filed another set of appeal papers on 29-04-2016 itself, duly signed digitally by the director Shri Lalit Nandlal Gupta. He submitted that the defect pointed out by Learned CIT(A) has since been rectified. However, the Learned CIT(A) has proceeded to dispose of the appeal without taking Hania Trade Invest Pvt. Ltd. 2 cognizance of the appeal papers filed on 29.04.2016. Accordingly he submitted that the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) may be set aside and the Ld CIT(A) may be directed to dispose of the appeal on merits. 3. We heard Ld D.R and perused the record. The assessee has furnished before us the copy of Form no.35 dated 29-04-2016, which was signed by the director Shri Lalit Nandlal Gupta. Admittedly, the defect pointed out by Learned CIT(A) has since been rectified by the assessee by filing revised Form No.35. We notice that the Learned CIT(A) has not taken cognizance of the revised Form No.35 filed by the assessee. Hence the impugned order passed by Learned CIT(A) cannot be sustained. Accordingly, we set aside the order passed by Learned CIT(A) and restore all the issues to his file for adjudicating them on merits. 4. However, it is not clear as to whether a new appeal number has been allotted to the revised Form no.35 filed by the assessee. If new appeal number has been allotted, then one of the appeals shall become infructuous. The LdCIT(A) may take suitable decision in this regard. 5. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on 30.06.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (RAHUL CHAUDHARY) (B.R. BASKARAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Mumbai; Dated : 30/06/2022 Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT(A) 4. CIT Hania Trade Invest Pvt. Ltd. 3 5. DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. Guard File. BY ORDER, //True Copy// (Assistant Registrar) PS ITAT, Mumbai