2014 (8) TMI 1004 - HC - Income Tax

Maintainability of appeal - Held that - By amending Section 246A of the Act by Finance Act, 2012, a remedy of appeal is provided against an intimation under Section 200A(1) of the Act with effect from 01.07.2012. It is fairly not disputed by the learned Standing Counsel for the respondents that if the appeals had been filed on or after 01.07.2012, the appeals were maintainable. Accordingly, as on the date of consideration of the appeals, the appeals were maintainable. It is stated that the appeals in question were filed on 11.04.2012. If the petitioner had filed these appeals after 01.07.2012, the appeals could not have been dismissed on the ground of maintainability. The only additional thing the petitioner should have done was to apply for condonation of the delay in filing the appeals. Hence, in my opinion, on the facts of this case and in the interest of justice, the Appellate Authority ought to have examined the appeals on merits by treating them as having been filed on 01.07.2012 and by condoning the delay, if any.

Summary

Issues:
Challenge against dismissal of appeals on grounds of maintainability.

Analysis:
The High Court judgment pertains to writ petitions challenging the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Bengaluru, which dismissed the petitioner's appeals in ITA Nos.11-14/Intl.Txn./2012-13 as not maintainable in law. The petitioner argued that the Appellate Authority erred in law in dismissing the appeals on the ground of maintainability. The Appellate Authority had based its decision on the lack of statutory remedy of appeal against an intimation sent under Section 200A(1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 at the time the appeals were filed in April 2012.

However, the High Court noted that an amendment to Section 246A of the Act by the Finance Act, 2012, provided a remedy of appeal against an intimation under Section 200A(1) of the Act with effect from 01.07.2012. The Court highlighted that if the appeals had been filed on or after 01.07.2012, they would have been maintainable. The Court emphasized that the appeals in question were filed on 11.04.2012, and if filed after 01.07.2012, they could not have been dismissed on the ground of maintainability. The Court suggested that the petitioner could have applied for condonation of the delay in filing the appeals if filed after the effective date of the amendment.

Consequently, the High Court set aside the impugned order and remitted the matter to the Appellate Authority for reconsideration of the appeals on merits without delving into the question of maintainability. The Court's decision was based on the facts of the case and the interest of justice, emphasizing that the Appellate Authority should have examined the appeals on merits by treating them as filed on 01.07.2012 and by condoning any delay in filing. The petitions were disposed of accordingly.