Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Delhi
Wig Brothers India Pvt. Ltd., Faridabad vs Dcit, New Delhi on 6 April, 2021
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH, 'G': NEW DELHI
(Through Video Conferencing)
BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND
SHRI SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
ITA No.5888/Del/2016
Assessment Year : 2013-14
Wig Brothers India Private Vs. DCIT,
Limited, Circle-27(1),
618, Sector-21A, C.R. Building,
Faridabad, New Delhi
Haryana-121001,
PAN-AAACW3144L
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Appellant by : Sh. R. K. Bansal, CA
Respondent by : Sh. Praskash Dubey, Sr. DR
Date of hearing : 24.03.2021
Date of pronouncement : 07.04.2021
ORDER
PER R.K. PANDA, AM :
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 12.09.2016 of the learned CIT(A)-9, New Delhi, relating to Assessment Year 2013-14.
2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under:-
1. On the facts and in circumstances of the case the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, New Delhi, erred in dismissing the appeal of the Company on the technical ground, that the appeal was not filed through e-filing system electronically, although the appeal was filed manually in paper format within due time.2 ITA No.5888/Del/2016
The other grounds of appeal are same as per appeal filed before the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals)-9, New Delhi, which are as under:-
2. on the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in disallowing a sum of Rs.2,00,000/- on Adhoc basis out of Vehicle Running & Maintenance Expenses of Rs.26,39,307/-
and Rs. 29,97,461/-on Travelling & Conveyance expenses incurred by the Assessee Company for business purposes of the Company.
3. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in disallowing a sum of Rs.1,00,000/- on Adhoc basis out of Business Promotion Expenses of Rs.9,09,864/- incurred by the Assessee Company for business Purpose of the Company.
4. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in disallowing a sum of Rs.4,30,885/- in disallowing out of Sundry Creditors Outstanding balances as on 31.03.2013 on Percentage basis, whose balances were not confirmed by the parties.
5. On the facts and circumstances of the case the Ld. Assessing Officer erred in initiating penalty proceedings u/s 271(1) (c) of the Income Tax Act 1961 for furnishing inaccurate particulars/conceal of income by the appellant.
3. After hearing both the sides, we find that the assessee is a private limited company, engaged in the business of Civil Construction. It filed its return of income on 27.09.2013 declaring total income of Rs.1,10,53,840/-, which was subsequently revised on 28.09.2013 declaring total income at Rs.1,17,05,910/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment under section 143(3) on 25.02.2016 determining total income at Rs.1,24,86,800/-. The assessee filed the appeal manually and in paper form on 10.03.2016. However, the learned CIT(A) noted that in terms of amended Rule 45 read 3 ITA No.5888/Del/2016 with Rule 12(3) of the IT Rules, 1962, the assessee was required to furnish the appeal electronically, either through digital signature or through electronic verification mode. The Form No.35 was to be in the specified format prescribed by the Pr. DGIT or the DGIT (Systems) in accordance with Rule 45(5) read with notification 5/2016 issued by the Pr. DGIT (Systems) dated 06.04.2016. The CBDT extended the time limit for filing e-appeals w.e.f. 01.03.2016 to 15.06.2016 vide circular no.20/2016 dated 26.05.2016. Since, the assessee in the instant case has filed the appeal manually in paper form and did not file the appeal electronically within that date i.e. 15.06.2016, therefore, he asked the assessee to inform whether the appeal had been e-filed by 15.06.2016 or alternatively, he was exempted from filing e-appeal in terms of clause (b) of Rule 45(2) of IT Rules. It was further informed that if neither course of action were applicable to the assessee, the paper appeal filed was to be treated as non-est. Rejecting various explanation given by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) held that since, the assessee has not filed the appeal in electronic form and filed the appeal manually, therefore, the appeal has become non-est. He, accordingly, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee in limine.
4. Aggrieved with such order of the learned CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.
5. We have considered the rival arguments made by both the sides, perused the orders of the AO and the CIT(A) and the paper book filed on behalf of the assessee. It is an admitted fact that the learned CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal in limine treating the same as non-est, since, the 4 ITA No.5888/Del/2016 assessee has not e-filed the appeal and has filed the same manually in paper form. The Co-ordinate Benches of the Tribunal are taking a lenient view in such cases with a direction to the Ld. CIT(A) to allow the assessee to e-file the appeal and decide the appeal on merit. We, direct the Ld. CIT(A) to allow the assessee to file the appeal in electronic mode and decide the appeal on merit. We hold and direct accordingly. The grounds raised by the assessee are accordingly allowed for statistical purposes.
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.
Oder pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing itself i.e. on 07.04.2021.
Sd/- Sd/-
(SUDHANSHU SRIVASTAVA) (R.K. PANDA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Delhi/Dated- 07.04.2021
f{x~{tÜ
Copy forwarded to: -
1. Appellant
2. Respondent
3. CIT
4. CIT(A)
5. DR, ITAT By Order
Assistant Registrar,
ITAT, Delhi