Tribunal allows second appeal, emphasizes fair opportunity for assessee, sets aside CIT(A)'s orders.

The Tribunal allowed the second appeal filed electronically by the assessee, condoning the delay in filing and directing the CIT(A) to decide on the appeal's merits. The dismissal of the first appeal for not being filed electronically did not bar the subsequent appeal, as the delay was considered bonafide. The Tribunal emphasized the need to provide the assessee with a fair opportunity for adjudication, setting aside the CIT(A)'s orders and restoring the appeal for consideration on its merits.

---

---

Issues: Appeal maintainability due to filing method, condonation of delay in filing appeal electronically, consideration of second appeal filed electronically, jurisdiction of CIT(A) after dismissal of first appeal.

Analysis:
1. Appeal Maintainability: The case involved two appeals by the same assessee against different orders of the Ld. CIT(A) for the A.Y. 2013-2014. The first appeal was dismissed as not maintainable because it was filed manually instead of electronically. The assessee then filed a fresh appeal electronically, seeking condonation of delay due to procedural issues. The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the subsequent appeal, stating that the recourse after the first dismissal should have been to file an appeal before the ITAT. However, the Tribunal held that the dismissal of the first appeal was on technical grounds and did not bar the assessee from filing a subsequent appeal electronically. The delay was considered bonafide, and the appeal was restored to the CIT(A) for a decision on merits.

2. Condonation of Delay: The assessee explained the delay in filing the appeal electronically, citing the need to obtain a digital signature from an approved agency, which took time. The Tribunal found the delay to be justifiable and condoned it, emphasizing that the procedural lapse should not deny justice to the assessee. The Tribunal set aside the CIT(A)'s orders and directed a decision on the appeal on its merits.

3. Consideration of Second Appeal: The Tribunal considered the second appeal filed electronically by the assessee after the dismissal of the first appeal. Despite the CIT(A) holding that the subsequent appeal could not be adjudicated upon, the Tribunal found that the dismissal of the first appeal did not preclude the assessee from filing a second appeal electronically. The Tribunal emphasized that the appeal should be decided on its merits, and the delay in filing electronically was condoned.

4. Jurisdiction of CIT(A) after Dismissal of First Appeal: The CIT(A) held that once the first appeal was dismissed, the assessee should have approached the ITAT. However, the Tribunal disagreed, stating that the dismissal of the first appeal on technical grounds did not prevent the assessee from filing a subsequent appeal electronically. The Tribunal directed the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on its merits, considering the delay as bonafide and justifiable.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the second appeal for statistical purposes, condoning the delay in filing electronically and directing the CIT(A) to decide the appeal on its merits, providing the assessee with a fair opportunity to present their case.

---