Procedural defect in electronic filing cannot defeat a timely appeal; matter restored for merits after curing the lapse.

A timely appeal filed in manual form could not be dismissed solely for non-compliance with a newly introduced electronic-filing requirement. The Tribunal treated the defect as procedural and technical, holding that such a lapse should not defeat a bona fide statutory appeal where the record was already before the appellate authority. Applying the principle that substantial justice prevails over a mere procedural default, the ITAT set aside the dismissal in limine and restored the matter to the Commissioner (Appeals) for decision on merits after treating the electronic filing as made on the date of the original manual filing.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee's appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) could be dismissed solely because it was filed in paper form instead of electronically, and whether the matter should be restored for disposal on merits.

Analysis: The appeal was filed within limitation in manual form, while the requirement of electronic filing under the amended appellate procedure was a newly introduced procedural mandate. The Tribunal treated the lapse as technical rather than substantive, emphasising that procedural rules are intended to advance justice and should not defeat a bona fide statutory appeal where the record was already before the appellate authority. The Tribunal also followed the coordinate bench view that substantial justice must prevail over a purely procedural default and that the appellate authority should decide the matter on merits after curing the filing defect.

Conclusion: The dismissal in limine was not sustained. The order of the Commissioner (Appeals) was set aside and the appeal was restored to the file of the Commissioner (Appeals) for adjudication on merits after treating the electronic filing as filed on the date of the original manual filing.

---