Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD
Before: SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH “A-SMC”, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER Assessment Year: 2013-14 Sanjeeva Reddy Siram, Vs. Income Tax Officer, Shot No.4-3-96, Gandhi Ward-1, Gunj, Bhainsa – 504103. Nirmal. PAN: AEYPS 0786 B (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee by: Sri P. Vinod Revenue by: Sri Sunil Babu, DR Date of hearing: 18/12/2019 Date of pronouncement: 23/01/2020 ORDER
This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. CIT(A)-5, Hyderabad in appeal No. 0122/2016-17/CIT(A)-5, dated 26/12/2017 passed U/s. 143(3) r.w.s 250(6) of the Act for the A.Y. 2013-14.
The assessee has raised the following grounds in his appeal:
“1. The Order of the CIT (A)-5 dated 26/12/2017 in is against the law and facts. 2. The Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of Rs. 14,27,875/- representing the differences in balances of sundry creditor in books vis-à-vis the balances confirmed by the respective sundry creditors. 3. The Ld. CIT(A) ought to have directed to add the element of gross profit of such excess amount (purchases) and not the entire amount.
4. Assuming while denying that the CIT(A)’s order is correct, the value of the closing ought to have been reduced by Rs. 14,75,875/-, else, it would result in double addition, in other words shall have cascading effect in subsequent years.
5. The appellant craves leave to add, amend or alter any of the aforesaid grounds as occasion may require.”
At the outset, it is observed from the record that there is a delay of 6 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, the assessee had submitted an affidavit seeking condonation of delay wherein the reasons for not filing the appeal within the prescribed time limit was explained. For reference, the relevant portions from the affidavit is extracted herein below:-
“………..The petitioner humbly submits that he is aged about 80 years. During the relevant period 25/6/2016 to 1/7/2016 he was suffering from Viral Fever and was undergoing medical treatment. A copy of the medical certificate is annexed to this petition. He could contact the Advocate on 2/7/2016 and got the appeal prepared on the same day. The appeal is being filed before the Hon’ble ITAT on 4/7/2016 as 2/7/2016 and 3/7/2016 are closed holidays for the Hon’ble ITAT on account of Saturday and Sunday. The petitioner humbly submits that the delay is for the reasons submitted above which are beyond the control of the petitioner and is not intentional. The petitioner therefore, prays the Hon’ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to kindly condone the delay and pass appropriate orders granting relief as prayed for.”
On perusal of the affidavit filed by the assessee explaining the reasons for delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal, I find merit in the submissions of the assessee. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I hereby condone the delay of 6 days in the filing the appeal before the Tribunal and proceed to hear the appeal on merits.
At the outset, the Ld. AR submitted before us that the entire addition of Rs. 14,27,875/- was made by the Ld. AO invoking the provisions of section 41(1) of the Act with respect to cessation of liability. The Ld. AR further submitted that the Ld. Revenue Authorities had arrived at the above conclusion because the creditors had confirmed lesser credit than what was disclosed in the statement of accounts of the assessee. The Ld. AR also submitted that proper reconciliation statement was not furnished before the ld. Revenue Authorities due to which they have made such addition. The Ld. AR pleaded that one more opportunity may be provided to the assessee for providing the reconciliation statement along with other relevant documents before the ld. Revenue Authorities in order to prove the genuineness of the credit balance of the creditors. The ld. DR on the other hand vehemently opposed to the submission of the ld. AR.
I have heard the rival submission and carefully perused the materials on record. The fact that the assessee had failed to produce proper explanation along cogent evidence before the ld. Revenue Authorities on the earlier occasions is not appreciable. However, consider the plight of the assessee, in the interest of justice, I hereby remit the matter back to the file of the Ld. AO for fresh consideration thereby providing the assessee with one more opportunity of being heard. I also direct the Ld AO to accept and examine any fresh evidence produced by the assessee in order to establish the genuineness of his claim and thereafter decide the matter in accordance with merit and law. I also caution the assessee to promptly co-operate before the Ld. Revenue Authorities failing which they shall be at liberty to adjudicate the issue based on the materials on record. It is ordered accordingly.
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes as indicated hereinabove.
Pronounced in the open Court on 23rd January, 2020.