Mayursinh Jayandrasinh Jadeja Vs ITO (ITAT Ahmedabad)
ITAT Ahmedabad held that dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) on technical/ procedural aspect merely because the appeal was filed manually instead of e-filing unjustified as assessee was not given an opportunity to cure the defect. Accordingly, appeal restored back.
Facts- The case of the assessee was reopened based on information received under the Annual Information Return (AIR), which indicated that the assessee had engaged in share transactions amounting to Rs.1,07,17,000/-. Consequently, a notice u/s. 148 of the Act was issued. Despite this, the assessee did not file a return in response to the notice, nor did he respond to subsequent notices issued u/s. 142(1) of the Act.
Based on the available material, AO made two additions during the course of assessment: an unexplained investment of Rs. 48,35,282/- u/s. 69A, and unexplained credit entries totalling to Rs. 11,50,736/-. The assessment was completed u/s. 144 read with section 147 of the Act, determining the total income at Rs. 59,86,020/-.
CIT(A) dismissed the appeal on the ground that the same was filed manually instead of e-filing. Being aggrieved, the present appeal is filed.
Conclusion- ITAT Rajkot in the case of LRs Management K/s vs. DCIT has held that mere mode of filing appeal – electronically or in physical mode, alone should not take away the assessee’s right to appeal, being just a technical/ procedural aspect that too not mandated by statute but by CBDT notification which has no persuasive value and is binding only on its Revenue Officers. Therefore also the order of CIT(A) dismissing the assessee’s appeal as not admitted is set aside.
