AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (7) TMI 716
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mputing income of the assessee at Rs. Nil. In the said draft assessment order the Ld. AO considered the short term capital loss of Rs. 922/- and long-term capital loss of Rs. 1,580,601,419/- as non-genuine and the same was, therefore, held as not allowable to be carried forward. 3. Being aggrieved by and/or dissatisfied with the said draft assessment order the assessee preferred an objection along with Form No. 35A on 19.01.2018 before the Dispute Resolution Panel (in short "DRP") in respect of the variations proposed by the AO. 4. During the course of proceedings before the DRP, it was observed by the Members of the panel that Form No. 35A filed by the assessee on 19.01.2018 was not verified as per the procedure laid down since the signature of the person on verification page in the said form was a copy of the original signature. On that premise the panel proceeded to consider the maintainability of the said objection filed by the assessee under Form No. 35A. 5. The same was brought to the notice of the Authorised Representative of the assessee on 24.08.2018 whereupon the assessee replied that the draft assessment order was received on 21.12.2017. It was submitted that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... behalf of some other person by scanning others signature as also observed by the DRP. The said Form No. 35A claimed to be filed in terms of Rule 4 of the DRP rules had not mentioned whether the same was verified with original signature for the reason as claimed by the assessee and hence the said application has been rejected in limine by the DRP. After careful reading of the order passed by the DRP we find no observation as regards the reason explained by the assessee for filing the Form No. 35A with the scanned signature. Rather, we find that when the concerned Director was not available at Mauritius, the assessee with bona fide intention got the said form signed by the other Director of the company available in United States of America and filed the scanned document thereon in due date. Even it is a defect in the eyes of law, according to us, it is procedural defects and curable in nature, since procedures are handmade of justice. On this issue we have considered the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Tribunal in the matter of MSM Satellite (Singapore) Pte. Ltd. vs. JCIT (2016) 75 taxmann.com 216 (Mumbai) as relied by the Ld. AR in support of his case. The relevant portion whe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e instant appeal is, thus, allowed with the direction upon the DRP to accept the original Form No. 35A submitted by the assessee and to proceed with the matter upon giving an opportunity of hearing to the assessee and to pass a reasoned order in accordance with law. 9. In the result, assessee's appeal is allowed for statistical purposes in the terms indicated above. 10. Before parting we would like to make certain observation relating to the issue cropped up under present scenario as to whether when the hearing of the matter was concluded on 08.01.2020 the order can be pronounced today i.e. on 28.07.2020. The issue has already been discussed by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of DCIT vs. JSW Ltd. (ITA Nos. 6264 & 6103/Mum/2018) pronounced on 14.05.2020 in the light of which it is well within the time limit permitted under Rule 34(5) of the Appellate Tribunal Rules, 1963 in view of the following observations made therein: "7. However, before we part with the matter, we must deal with one procedural issue as well. While hearing of these appeals was concluded on 8th January 2020, this order thereon is being pronounced today on the day of 14th May, 2020, much after the expir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... expression "ordinarily" has been inserted in the requirement to pronounce the order within a period of 90 days. The question then arises whether the passing of this order, beyond ninety days, was necessitated by any "extraordinary" circumstances. 9. Let us in this light revert to the prevailing situation in the country. On 24th March, 2020, Hon'ble Prime Minister of India took the bold step of imposing a nationwide lockdown, for 21 days, to prevent spread of Covid 19 epidemic, and this lockdown was extended from time to time. As a matter of fact, even before this formal nationwide lockdown, the functioning of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Mumbai was severely restricted on account of lockdown by the Maharashtra Government, and on account of strict enforcement of health advisories with a view of checking spread of Covid 19. The epidemic situation in Mumbai being grave, there was not much of a relaxation in subsequent lockdowns also. In any case, there was unprecedented disruption of judicial wok all over the country. As a matter of fact, it has been such an unprecedented situation, causing disruption in the functioning of judicial machinery, that Hon'ble Supreme Court o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ooding omnipotence in the sky. It is a pragmatic tool of the social order. The tenets of law being enacted on the basis of pragmatism, and that is how the law is required to interpreted. The interpretation so assigned by us is not only in consonance with the letter and spirit of rule 34(5) but is also a pragmatic approach at a time when a disaster, notified under the Disaster Management Act 2005, is causing unprecedented disruption in the functioning of our justice delivery system. Undoubtedly, in the case of Otters Club Vs DIT [(2017) 392 ITR 244 (Bom)], Hon'ble Bombay High Court did not approve an order being passed by the Tribunal beyond a period of 90 days, but then in the present situation Hon'ble Bombay High Court itself has, vide judgment dated 15th April 2020, held that directed "while calculating the time for disposal of matters made timebound by this Court, the period for which the order dated 26th March 2020 continues to operate shall be added and time shall stand extended accordingly". The extraordinary steps taken suo motu by Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court and Hon'ble Supreme Court also indicate that this period of lockdown cannot be treated as an ordinary period du....