D Saivenugopal, Chennai V. ITO, NCW 6(1), Chennai

ITA 385/CHNY/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1850 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 15-02-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MRS D ROHINI
• Assessee Lawyers: R PADMANABHAN
• Keywords: Set aside

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH: CHENNAI , . , & BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.385/CHNY/2019 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SHRI D.SAIVENUGOPAL, NEW NO.11, OLD NO.5, SAMI CHETTY ST., PUDUPET, CHENNAI-600 002. [PAN: BETPS 6046 G] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, NON-CORPORATE WARD-6(1), CHENNAI. ( ( /APPELLANT) ( )*( /RESPONDENT) ( + / APPELLANT BY : MR.R.PADMANABHAN, CA )*( + /RESPONDENT BY : MRS.D.ROHINI, JCIT + /DATE OF HEARING : 17.06.2019 + /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 17.06.2019 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-15, CHENNAI, I N ITA NO.91/CIT(A)- 15/2016-17 DATED 28.12.2018 FOR THE AY 2013-14. 2. MRS.D.ROHINI, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE AND MR.R.PADMANABHAN, CA, REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.385/CHNY/2019 :- 2 -: 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ONLY ISSU E IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL IS AGAINST THE ACTION OF THE LD.CIT(A) IN DI SMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF LIMITATION. IT WAS A SU BMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD.CIT(A) MANUALLY ON 25.04.2016. HOWEVER, IN VIEW OF THE RULE 45 OF INCO ME TAX RULES, 1962, IT WAS MADE COMPULSORY TO FILE THE APPEALS BY E-FIL ING W.E.F. 01.03.2016. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT CONSEQUENTLY, SHOW CAUSE NOTICE HAS BEEN ISSUED TO THE ASSESSEE ON 30.11.2018 ASKING WHY THE APPEAL SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED AS IT WAS NOT FILED UNDER E-FILING. I T WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD REPLIED AND THE REPLY WAS REJECTED AND THE MANUAL APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS TREATED AS VOID , AB INITIO AND THE DELAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL IN RESPECT OF E-FILING WAS NOT CONDONED AND THE APPEAL WAS DISMISSED IN LIMINE. IT WAS A SUBMISSIO N THAT UNDER SIMILAR CIRCUMSTANCES, IN THE CASE OF SHRI G.P.SARAVANAN VS . ITO IN ITA NO.279/CHNY/2019 VIDE AN ORDER DATED 10.05.2019, IT WAS HELD THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL MANUALLY AND ALSO E-FILING FOR SUCH APPEAL WOULD RELATED BACK TO THE ORIGINAL DATE OF FILING O F APPEAL MANUALLY AND CONSEQUENTLY, IT CANNOT BE HELD THAT THERE WAS A DE LAY IN FILING OF THE APPEAL. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT CONSEQUENTLY, THE LD.CIT(A) MAY BE DIRECTED TO DISPOSE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON M ERITS. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORD ER OF THE AO AND THE LD.CIT(A). 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. ITA NO.385/CHNY/2019 :- 3 -: 6. A PERUSAL OF THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BEN CH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI G.P.SARAVANAN VS. ITO, REFERRED TO SUPRA, WHEREIN, IT HAS BEEN HELD AS FOLLOWS: 4. HAVING HEARD THE LD.COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND THE LD. D.R., THIS TRIBUNAL FINDS THAT THE APPEAL WAS MANUALLY FILED ON 02.05.2016. IT IS NOT THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT ANY DEFECT MEMO WAS ISSUED OR THE APPEAL WAS RETURNED. WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE MANUALLY, IF IT IS NOT IN TUNE WITH THE ST ATUTORY REQUIREMENT, IT IS FOR THE CIT(APPEALS) EITHER TO ISSUE A DEFECT MEMO OR TO RET URN THE APPEAL FILED MANUALLY, TO THE ASSESSEE. ADMITTEDLY, NO SUCH ACTION WAS TAKEN BY T HE CIT(APPEALS). THE APPEAL WAS EFILED ON 22.12.2018. THEREFORE, THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE C ONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN THE ASSESSEE ADMITTEDLY FILED THE APPEAL MANUALLY ON 02.05.2016 AND ALSO E-FILED ON 22.12.2018, THE ASSESSEES EFILING OF APPEAL WOULD RELATE BACK TO T HE ORIGINAL DATE OF FILING APPEAL MANUALLY ON 02.05.2016. IN OTHER WORDS, THERE IS NO DELAY IN FILING THE 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 AT ALL. HENCE, THE CIT(APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE DISPOSED OF TH E APPEAL ON MERIT. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE ARE UNABLE TO UPHOLD THE ORDERS OF THE AU THORITIES BELOW. ACCORDINGLY, ORDERS OF BOTH THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ARE SET ASIDE AND THE EN TIRE 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 LAW, AFTER GIVING A REASONA BLE OPPORTUNITY TO THE ASSESSEE. 7. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-OR DINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF SHRI G.P.SARAVANAN VS. ITO, REFERRED TO SUPRA, AS THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS APPEAL MANUALLY ON 25.04 .2016 AND HAS E-FILED THE SAME ON 12.01.2019, THE SAID E-FILED APPEAL WOU LD IN FACT RELATE BACK TO THE DATE OF FILING OF THE APPEAL MANUALLY ON 25. 04.2016. THIS BEING SO, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE ORDER OF THE LD.CIT(A) IS UNSUSTAINABLE AND CONSEQUENTLY, SET ASIDE THE SAME AND THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE LD.CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICAT ION ON MERITS. 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 17 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2019, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) /JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.385/CHNY/2019 :- 4 -: /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED: 17 TH JUNE, 2019. TLN + )34 54 /COPY TO: 1. ( /APPELLANT 4. 6 /CIT 2. )*( /RESPONDENT 5. 4 ) /DR 3. 6 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF