PEARL FINANCE, MUMBAI V. ITO 17(2)(5), MUMBAI

ITA 7270/MUM/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2014 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 17-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 19-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: CHAITANYA ANJARIA
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard

Judgement Text

T HE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ( A M) I.T.A. NO. 7270 /MUM/ 201 8 (ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 13 - 14 ) M/S. PEARL FINANCE OFFICE NO. 10 GROUND FLOOR BUILDING NO. 89 BACK SIDE OF M.K. BHAVAN, MIND ROAD FORT, MUMBAI. P AN : AAFFP3642L V S . ITO WARD 17(2)(5) AAYAKAR BHAVAN ROOM NO. 123A M.K. ROAD MUMBAI - 400 020. ( APPELLANT ) ( RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY SHRI DEVENDRA JAIN DEPARTMENT BY SHRI CHAITANYA ANJARIA DATE OF HEARING 1 7 .6 . 201 9 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 17 . 6 . 201 9 O R D E R THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LEARNED CIT(A) DATED 10.9.2018 AND PERTAINS TO A.Y. 2013 - 14. 2. THE PRELIMINARY ISSUE RAISED IS THAT LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION A ND ON THE TECHNICAL GROUND THAT THE APPEAL WAS NOT FILED ELECTRONICALLY. 3. I HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. IT TRANSPIRES THAT SUBSEQUENT TO THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSEE HAS PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE L EARNED CIT(A). IN HIS APPELLATE ORDER LEARNED CIT(A) NOTED THAT THERE WAS REQUEST FOR ADJOURNMENT. THEREAFTER LEARNED CIT(A) NOTED THAT FOR THE PRESENT ASSESSMENT YEAR ASSESSEE WAS SUPPOSED TO FILE APPEAL ELECTRONICALLY, BUT LEARNED CIT(A) NOTED THAT ASSES SEE HAS FILED APPEAL MANUALLY. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE SAME COULD NOT BE DONE BECAUSE OF 2 TECHNICAL GLITCHES. LEARNED CIT(A) REJECTED THIS AND ACCORDINGLY DISMISSED THE APPEAL IN LIMINE. 4. UPON CAREFUL CONSIDERATION, I FIND THAT IT HAS BEEN SETTLED LAW THAT LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD DECIDE UPON THE MERITS OF THE CASE AND NOT DISMISS THE APPEAL FOR NON - PROSECUTION. SECONDLY, IT IS NOTED THAT THIS WAS THE FIRST YEAR IN WHICH IT WAS MANDATED THAT ASSESSEE WAS TO FILE APPEAL IN ELECTRONIC MODE. HOWEVER, ASSESSEE S PLEA IS THAT THERE WERE SOME TECHNICAL GLITCHES AND DUE TO THIS RETURN WAS FILED MANUALLY. I NOTE THAT IT IS SETTLED LAW THAT IN THE WEB OF HYPER TECHNICALTI E S JUSTICE SHOULD NOT TAKEN THE BACKSEAT. MOREOVER, ITAT IN SIMILAR CASE IN ITAT NO. 7134/MUM/2017 VID E ORDER DATED 4.5.2018 HAS REMITTED THE MATTER TO THE FILE OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) TO ADJUDICATE UPON THE MERITS OF THE CASE. 5. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE BACKGROUND OF AFORESAID DISCUSSION AND PRECEDENT, I REMIT THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF LEARNED CIT(A). LEARNED CIT(A) IS DIRECTED TO PASS A SPEAKING ORDER UPON ADJUDICATION OF THE ISSUES RAISED IN THE APPEAL AFTER GIVING THE ASSESSEE PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD. 6. IN THE RESULT, THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER HAS BE EN PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 17 . 6 . 201 9 . SD/ - (SH A MIM YAHYA ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI ; DATED : 17 / 6 / 20 1 9 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWAR DED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. CIT 5. DR, ITAT, MUMBAI 3 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER, //TRUE COPY// ( ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ) PS ITAT, MUMBAI