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.
Conclusion: The decision of the Jaipur ITAT in the case of Zila Parisad Vs ACIT underscores the importance of procedural compliance in income tax appeals. The tribunal’s directive to allow the taxpayer to rectify the deficiency ensures fairness in the adjudication process. It also highlights the significance of adhering to the prescribed rules and providing adequate opportunities to taxpayers to present their case effectively.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT JAIPUR
Both the appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of the ld. CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi even dated 10.11.2023 in respect of Assessment Years: 2018-19 & 2019-20 challenging therein the ex-party order dismissing the appeals as erroneous and not maintainable. There are common issues raised, on identical facts, in both the appeals and therefore, these appeals are adjudicated simultaneously.
2. At the outset, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the assessee has filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A) on the e-filing portal of the department in respect of Assessment Year: 2018-19. Inadvertently, the assessment year has wrongly been mentioned as 2017-18 and therefore, he has filed a rectification application for removal of deficiency in the appeal memo. However, the ld. CIT(A) has observed that the information of the e-filing portal is based on the details furnished in the appeal memo in Form 35 by the appellant only. Any correction in the appeal memo in Form 35 and verification thereof ought to be made only by the appellant by filing a revised appeal memo on the e-filing portal in the prescribed manner as per Rule 45 of Income Tax Rules, 1962. Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has rejection appeal of the assessee by holding it as erroneous as such and not maintainable.
3. The ld. Counsel pleaded that the matter may be restored back to the ld. CIT(A) with the direction to permit removal of the deficiency in the appeal memo and adjudicate appeal on merits of the case.
4. Per contra, the ld. DR stands by the impugned order, however, he has no objection to the request of the assessee.
5. Heard the rival contention and perused the material on record, and the impugned order. Admittedly, the assessee has committed a mistake while filling the form No. 35 wherein it has mentioned a wrong assessment year as 2017-18 in place of correct assessment year 2018-19 on e-filing appeal portal of the department before the ld. CIT(A). Thus, the ld. CIT(A) has rightly observed that the information in the e-filing portal is based on the details furnished in the appeal memo in Form 35 by the appellant only, and therefore, if any correction is to be required in the appeal memo in Form 35 and verification thereof or to be made only by the appellant by filing a revised appeal memo on e-filing portal in the prescribed manner as per Rule 45 of Income Tax Rules, 1962. Under the circumstances, we are of the considered view, that either the ld. CIT(A) would have issued a deficiency letter to the appellant assessee for removal of such deficiency regarding correction of the assessment year on the e-filing portal of the department or permitting filing a revised appeal memo in Form 35 with due verification of the appellant in the manner prescribed under Rules 45 of Income Tax Rules, 1962. Accordingly, the matter is restored to the file of the ld. CIT(A) with the direction to allow the appellant assessee 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 and on filing of appeal in revised appeal memo, the CIT(A) shall adjudicate the appeal on merits of the case after granting adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. Thus, the matter is restored back to the file of the ld. CIT(A) to adjudicate the matter afresh as per law.
6. In the result, both the appeals filed by the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on 15.02.2024
Author Bio
