Case Law Details
Zila Parisad Vs ACIT (ITAT Jaipur)
Introduction: In a recent decision, the Jaipur Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) ruled in the case of Zila Parisad Vs ACIT, directing the Department to allow the taxpayer to file a revised appeal memo in Form 35 either on the e-filing portal of the Department or physical form, in the prescribed manner as per Rules 45 of Income Tax Rules, 1962 for the removal of a deficiency. This article provides a detailed analysis of the case and the implications of the tribunal’s decision.
Detailed Analysis: The case involved appeals filed by the assessee against separate orders of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi, pertaining to Assessment Years 2018-19 & 2019-20. The appeals challenged the dismissal of the appeals as erroneous and not maintainable. The primary issue revolved around an error in mentioning the assessment year in the appeal memo in Form 35 filed on the e-filing portal of the department.
The assessee inadvertently mentioned the assessment year as 2017-18 instead of 2018-19 and sought rectification of this error. However, the ld. CIT(A) rejected the appeal, stating that any correction in the appeal memo should be made by filing a revised appeal memo in Form 35 on the e-filing portal as per Rule 45 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962.
Upon considering the arguments presented by both parties, the Jaipur ITAT found merit in the assessee’s plea. It noted that the ld. CIT(A) should have either issued a deficiency letter to the appellant for rectifying the error or allowed the filing of a revised appeal memo. Accordingly, the tribunal directed the matter to be restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) for allowing the appellant to file a revised appeal memo in the prescribed manner.
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
