ITAT remands appeal dismissed by CIT(A) for mentioning wrong section in Form No. 35 and grounds of appeal and form 35 not matching to each other
ABCAUS Case Law Citation:
ABCAUS 3782 (2023) (07) ITAT
In the instant case, the assessee had challenged the order passed by the CIT(A) National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC) in dismissing the appeal of the assessee on technical reason that grounds of appeal and form 35 are not matching to each other.
The CIT(A) had dismissed the appeal that it is a deficient/defective appeal due to the said mismatch of the grounds of appeals and Form No. 35.
The Tribunal observed that the assesse had raised the grounds before the CIT(A) against the assessment order passed u/s 144 r.w.s 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act). However, in the Appeal Form 35 the assessee had mentioned section under which the order was passed by the ITO as 271(1)(b) of the Act.
The Tribunal opined that it is apparent that there was a mistake in form 35 if it was considered in light of the grounds of appeal raised by the assesse. Further in the statement of facts the assessee had clearly stated his grievance against the assessment order passed by the AO.
Therefore, in the facts and circumstances of the case and in the interest of justice, the ITAT set aside the impugned order of the CIT(A) and remanded the matter to grant one more opportunity to the assessee to rectify the mistake in form 35 and then decide the appeal of the assesse on merits.
Non issuance of notice u/s 143(2) for return filed u/s 148 even though belatedly, makes the assessment framed bad in…
Calculation of functional disability depends on assessing the victim’s earning capacity in the open, competitive market – Supreme Court In…
Appeal against every decision of ITAT shall lie only before the High Court within whose jurisdiction the Assessing Officer who…
Supreme Court recommends action against Commissioner of Customs who relied upon non-existent AI generated case laws. Supreme Court recommends action…
ITAT power to pass such orders "as it thinks fit" implies a judicial discretion to be exercised within the parameters…
Mere non-deduction of TDS by the deductor on a transaction does not change the character of the transaction to make…