2021 (12) TMI 449 - AT - Income Tax

Non filling of Electronic appeal - appeals filed by the assessee filled physically - demise of late RR Mehta - As submitted non filing of the electronic appeal was on account of the inaccessibility of the Income tax portal to the estate of Shri Ramniklal R.Mehta - HELD THAT - As the appeal was filed in physical form , though was required to be filed in electronic form before the appellant authority. Needful was not done and sufficient reasons were given before us for not preferring the appeal in electronic form by the estate of Shri Ramniklal R. Mehta. Board framed the rules to achieve the ends of Justice and not to put impediments in the path of Justice. The assessee can not be asked to manage the portal of the revenue and forcibly file the appeal electronically. In our view,the assessee made sufficient and sincere efforts to file the appeal in electronic forms, albeit the assessee failed in his efforts for the reasons recorded in the order.In our considered opinion, the non filing of the electronic appeal was on account of the inaccessibility of the Income tax portal to the estate of Shri RamniklalR.Mehta and assessee was forced to file the appeal in physical form . The assessee had preferred the appeal in electronic form on 12/03/2021 against the same assessment order dated 28/12/2018. In our view the revenue can not take the benefit of non functioning/ malfunctioning of its portal and deny the statutory right of the assesse. In any case the assessee can not be non suited for abrastion in the portal of the revenue. CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeals filed by the assessee filled physically as well as electronically on merit - Appeals of the assessee are allowed for statistical purposes .

Issues Involved:
1. Validity of filing an appeal in physical mode.
2. Inaccessibility of the e-filing portal due to PAN issues.
3. Legal requirements for filing appeals electronically as per Rule 45 of the I.T. Rules.
4. Justification for non-filing of electronic appeals due to technical issues.
5. Directions for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on handling the case.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Validity of Filing an Appeal in Physical Mode:
The primary issue addressed was whether the appeal filed by the assessee in physical mode was valid. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had dismissed the appeal as invalid since it was not filed electronically as mandated by Rule 45 of the I.T. Rules, effective from 01/03/2016. The appellate order stated, "The right to appeal is a statutory right and it can be circumscribed by the condition in the grant." It emphasized that filing an appeal in the prescribed form and manner is mandatory, and the Commissioner (Appeals) has no discretion to waive this requirement.

2. Inaccessibility of the E-filing Portal Due to PAN Issues:
The assessee argued that the PAN of the appellant was disabled for the e-filing portal login, confirmed by the Assessing Officer. The PAN issue arose because the PAN was initially held by the deceased, and a new PAN was later allotted to the estate. The assessee faced technical difficulties logging into the portal, as the system treated the estate as a minor, preventing access. The assessee's attempts to resolve this through the ITBA portal and e-filing helpdesk were unsuccessful.

3. Legal Requirements for Filing Appeals Electronically as per Rule 45 of the I.T. Rules:
The Tribunal acknowledged that Rule 45 mandates electronic filing of appeals. It cited the rule: "An appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals) shall be made in Form no.35...by furnishing the form electronically under digital signature, if the return of income is furnished under digital signature." The Tribunal noted that the estate had been filing returns electronically even after the demise of the original PAN holder, thus the appeal should have been filed electronically.

4. Justification for Non-filing of Electronic Appeals Due to Technical Issues:
The Tribunal considered the assessee's justification for filing the appeal in physical form due to technical issues with the e-filing portal. It stated, "The Board framed the rules to achieve the ends of Justice and not to put impediments in the path of Justice." The Tribunal found the assessee's efforts to file electronically sincere but hindered by portal inaccessibility. It concluded that the non-filing of the electronic appeal was due to the malfunctioning of the portal and not the assessee's fault.

5. Directions for the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on Handling the Case:
The Tribunal set aside the orders passed by the CIT(A) and issued specific directions:
A. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeals filed by the assessee both physically and electronically on merit.
B. The CIT(A) shall grant the opportunity of hearing to the assessee and permit the filing of any additional documents deemed appropriate.
C. The CIT(A) is directed to decide the appeal after affording the opportunity of hearing to the assessee in accordance with the rules.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeals for statistical purposes, emphasizing that the revenue cannot benefit from the malfunctioning of its portal and deny the statutory right of the assessee. The order was pronounced in the open court on 30.11.2021.

← Previous Next →