2024 (10) TMI 352 - AT - Income Tax

Rectification petition rejected - interest u/s. 244A of the Act was not calculated properly on the refund issued and requested to grant interest from the period April 2010 onwards - As aggrieved by the said rectification order u/s.154 the appellant filed appeal before the Ld. CIT(A) which was also dismissed on the ground that the appeal was not filed electronically and the appeal was filed manually During the appellant proceedings before us, as submitted that the CIT(A)has not heard the case on merit and the Ld. CIT(A) should have considered the appeal on the basis of the documents produced before him even though in the physical form. HELD THAT - Appellant submissions made before us and we consider it proper to direct the Ld. CIT(A) to take into consideration all the documents filed by the appellant and decide the issue on the merit of the case by providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the appellant. In the result, the appeal is allowed for statistical purpose.

Summary

Issues:
1. Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) without considering physical documents filed by the appellant.
2. Non-disposal of grounds of appeals by CIT(A) leading to non-consideration of merits.
3. Validity of appeal filed manually against CBDT Circular No. 20/2016.

Analysis:

Issue 1: Dismissal of appeal by CIT(A) without considering physical documents
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the Ld. CIT (Appeals) under section 250 of the Income Tax Act. The grounds of appeal included the wrongful dismissal of the appeal by the CIT(A) without considering the physical documents filed by the appellant. The appellant argued that the CIT(A) erred in law and on facts by not taking into account the documents submitted physically before him on specific dates. The appellant highlighted the acknowledgment numbers of the documents filed and contended that the CIT(A) wrongly held that the appellant did not respond to various notices, which were never served. The Tribunal acknowledged the appellant's submissions and directed the CIT(A) to consider all the documents filed by the appellant and decide the issue on its merits by providing a fair opportunity for the appellant to be heard.

Issue 2: Non-disposal of grounds of appeals by CIT(A)
Another ground raised by the appellant was the non-disposal of certain grounds of appeal by the CIT(A). The appellant contended that the CIT(A) failed to address Ground nos. 1 to 9 raised before him. This non-disposal led to the appellant's contentions not being considered, affecting the overall decision-making process. The Tribunal recognized this lapse and directed the CIT(A) to ensure that all grounds of appeal are properly disposed of, allowing for a comprehensive consideration of the appellant's arguments.

Issue 3: Validity of appeal filed manually against CBDT Circular
The appellant's appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) on the basis that it was filed manually, contrary to the CBDT Circular No. 20/2016, which mandated electronic filing of appeals after a specified date. The CIT(A) considered the manual filing as a deficiency and issued a notice to rectify the appeal, which the appellant did not respond to. Subsequently, the appeal was dismissed by the CIT(A) citing a decision of the Hon'ble High Court of Madras. The Tribunal, however, noted that the CIT(A) did not hear the case on its merits and emphasized the importance of considering the documents produced by the appellant, even in physical form. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to reevaluate the appeal, taking into account all relevant documents and providing a fair hearing to the appellant.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing the need for a thorough consideration of all documents and grounds of appeal to ensure a just and fair decision-making process.