9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (11) TMI 730X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e the appeal is filed within the time. Even if Form 35 was not filed in, in respect of the date of receipt of assessment order, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that defect memo ought to have been issued so that the assessee might have rectified the defect. The very object of mentioning the date of receipt of the assessment order is to compute the period of limitation. In this case, admittedly, the appeal is filed within the period of limitation. Therefore, there is no justification for dismissing the appeal on technicality on the ground that the date of receipt of the assessment order was not mentioned in Form 35. Moreover, the appeal was admittedly filed on 28.01.2011. The appeal is pending for the last 8 years. After keep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... CIT(A) on 28.01.2011. Therefore, the appeal was filed within the period of limitation. Even if the column in Form 35 was not filled in respect of date of service of the order appealed against, the CIT(A) ought to have issued a defect memo. Admittedly no defect memo was issued and he simply dismissed the appeal without considering anything on merit. 2.1 Referring to the order of the CIT(A) for the assessment year 2008-09, the Ld.Representative for the assessee submitted that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal of the assessee on the ground that Form 35 was verified on 28.12.2011 and the demand notice was served on the assessee on 03.01.2012. Therefore, the CIT(A) found that the appellant could not have verified Form 35 on 28.12.2011, which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itation. Therefore, there is no justification for dismissing the appeal on technicality on the ground that the date of receipt of the assessment order was not mentioned in Form 35. Moreover, the appeal was admittedly filed on 28.01.2011. The appeal is pending for the last 8 years. After keeping the matter for last 8 years, dismissing the appeal on the ground that date of receipt of assessment order was not filled in Form 35 is not correct. In the opinion of this Tribunal, the CIT(A) ought to have disposed the appeal on merit after considering the grounds of appeal of appeal and other material on record. Since such an exercise was not done, the matter needs to be reconsidered by the CIT(A). 5. Similarly for the assessment year 2008-09, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
