Preseilla Yeddu, Hyderabad V. Income Tax Officer, Ward-11(4), Hyderabad

ITA 551/Hyd/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 115 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4467 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 15-03-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB-A
• Next Hearing Date: 13-03-2019
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 26-03-2018
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P V SUBBA RAJU
• Assessee Lawyers: T CHAINTANYA KUMAR
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard
• Section: 143(3); 144

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH A, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI D.S. SUNDER SINGH, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 551/HYD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 SMT. PRESEILLA YEDDU, PROP: M/S. LAKSHMI NARSIMHA FILLING STATION MIRYALAGUD. PAN ABTPY2978B VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1, NALGONDA. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI T. CHAINTANYA KUMAR REVENUE BY : SHRI P.V. SUBBARAJU DATE OF HEARING : 13-03-2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 15-03-2019 ORDER PER D.S. SUNDER SINGH, A.M: THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) 3 (CIT(A)-3), HYDERABAD DATED 22.02.2018. 2. ALL THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL ARE RELATED TO THE DISMISSAL OF APPEAL FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC MODE. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE ACT ON TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 99,04,060/- AGAINST THE RETURNED INCOME OF RS. 6,08,150/- BY AN ORDER U/S 144 DATED 31.03.2016. THE ASSESSEE WENT ON APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) AND FILED THE APPEAL MANUALLY IN PAPER FORMAT INSTEAD OF FILING THE APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC MODE AS REQUIRED UNDER RULE 2 ITA NO. 551/HYD/2018 PRESEILLA YEDDU., NALGONDA. 45 OF IT RULES. THE APPEAL REQUIRED TO BE FILED IN ELECTRONIC MODE W.E.F 01.03.2016. THEREFORE, THE CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINI. AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) THE ASSESSEE FILED APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. 3. DURING THE APPEAL HEARING, THE LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS A PETROL BUNK OWNER RESIDING AT MIRYALAGUDA IN NALGONDA DISTRICT. HE IS NOT WELL-VERSED WITH THE INCOME TAX RULES AND THE PRACTITIONERS IN AND AROUND THE NALGONDA DISTRICT ARE ALSO NOT WELL-VERSED WITH THE FILING OF APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC MODE. THE LD. AR FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT DURING THE INITIAL PERIOD OF INTRODUCTION OF FILING OF APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC MODE, LOT OF PROBLEMS WERE FACED BY THE ASSESSES IN UPLOADING THE APPEALS, HENCE, IN GOOD NUMBER OF CASES THE ASSESSEE HAVE FILED THE APPEAL IN PAPER FORMAT. SINCE THERE WAS NO INTENTIONAL NONCOMPLIANCE, THE LD. AR REQUESTED TO REMIT THE APPEAL TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A)AND TO DECIDE THE APPEAL ON MERITS. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE LD.CIT(A) DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS FOR NOT FILING THE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY, AS PER NOTIFICATION ISSUED BY CBDT VIDE NO. 11/2016 DATED 01.03.2016,WITHOUT GOING IN TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE. THE APPEAL WAS FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A) AND THE OFFICE OF THE LD.CIT(A) ACCEPTED THE APPEAL WITHOUT REJECTING THE SAME. THOUGH IT IS MANDATORY TO FILE THE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY IT IS ALSO RESPONSIBILITY OF THE DEPARTMENT TO GUIDE THE ASSESSEE PROPERLY AND TO MAKE ARRANGEMENTS TO SHIFT THE MODE FROM MANUAL TO ELECTRONIC MODE AND ALSO ARRANGE FOR HELP CENTRES TO AVOID THE 3 ITA NO. 551/HYD/2018 PRESEILLA YEDDU., NALGONDA. INCONVENIENCE CAUSED TO THE TAX PAYERS. THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED THE APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A) IN A PAPER FORM AND ACCEPTED BY THE OFFICE OF THE CIT(A) , SHOWS THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT GUIDED PROPERLY AND THE DEPARTMENT ALSO DID NOT CONSIDER IT AS A SERIOUS DEFECT. IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO ADDRESS THE GRIEVANCE. ON IDENTICAL FACTS THE COORDINATE BENCH OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ITA NO. 1730/HYD/2018 DATED 09.01.2019 REMITTED THE MATTER BACK TO THE FILE OF THE CIT(A) WITH A DIRECTION TO ADJUDICATE THE ISSUE ON MERITS. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE AND CLARITY WE EXTRACT THE RELEVANT PORTION OF THE ORDER AS UNDER: 7.1 ON PERUSAL OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 20/2016, ALL THE ASSESSEES ARE ADVISED TO FILE THE E-APPEAL AND WHOEVER FILED MANUAL APPEAL, THEY CAN FILE E-APPEAL BEFORE 15/06/2016 IN ORDER TREAT THE SAME AS FILED WITHIN TIME. WE OBSERVE THAT THIS IS COMPLIANCE ADVISE AND THE ASSESSEES WHO ARE FILING THE EAPPEAL SUBSEQUENT TO 15/06/2016, THEY WILL BE TREATED AS APPEAL FILED BELATEDLY. THEREFORE, CIT(A) SHOULD NOT HAVE DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN-LIMINE, RATHER, HE SHOULD HAVE ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO COMPLY WITH THE DIRECTIONS AS PER CIRCULAR NO. 20/2016 AND HE COULD HAVE GIVEN ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO ASSESSEE TO E-FILE THE APPEAL. WE HAVE NOT SATISFIED WITH THE EXPLANATION OFFERED BY THE ASSESSEE NOT TO E-FILE THE APPEAL. AS PER THE CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 20/2016, ALL THE APPEALS HAVE TO BE E-FILED. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE APPEAL THROUGH E- FILING AND DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO ACCEPT THE E-APPEAL AFRESH AND ADJUDICATE THE MATTER ON MERIT. ACCORDINGLY, GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. 4.1 SINCE, THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL, WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT THE ASSESSEE SHOULD BE GIVEN OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE ASSESSEE TO FILE THE APPEAL THROUGH E-FILING AND DIRECT THE CIT(A) TO ACCEPT THE E-FILING AND ADJUDICATE THE MATTER ON MERITS. 4 ITA NO. 551/HYD/2018 PRESEILLA YEDDU., NALGONDA. 5. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 15 TH MARCH, 2019 SD/- SD/- (V. DURGA RAO) (D.S. SUNDER SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED:15 TH MARCH , 2019. KRK 1 SHRI T. CHAITANYAKUMAR, ADV, FLAT NO. 102, GOURI APARTMENT, URDULANE, HIMAYATNAGAR, HYDERABAD 2 ITO, WARD 1, NALGONDA. 3 THE CIT(A)-3, HYDERABAD. 4 THE PR. CIT-3, HYDERABAD 5 THE DR, ITAT HYDERABAD 6 GUARD FILE