Loading judgment…
Facts
The assessee's appeal was filed with a delay of 97 days, for which an affidavit of condonation was filed and accepted as bonafide. The Assessing Officer made an addition because the assessee failed to submit details of members to whom credit facilities were extended during assessment proceedings.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal. The petition to admit additional evidence (list of members) was allowed in the interest of justice, and the Assessing Officer was directed to consider this list while passing the order.
Key Issues
Whether the delay in filing the appeal is to be condoned and if additional evidence can be admitted for consideration by the Assessing Officer.
Sections Cited
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Before: Shri S.S. Viswanethra Ravi & Shri S.R. Raghunatha
Year: 2017-18 Pothanur PACB Ltd., Vs. The Income Tax Officer, S.390, Pothanur Road, Paramathi Ward 2, Velur, Namakkal 638 182. Namakkal. [PAN:AAABP0259L] (अपीलाथ�/Appellant) (��थ�/Respondent) अपीलाथ� की ओर से / Appellant by : Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A ��थ� की ओर से/Respondent by : Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date of hearing : 21.08.2025 घोषणा की तारीख /Date of Pronouncement : 26.08.2025 आदेश /O R D E R
PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER:
This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order dated 18.11.2024 passed by the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi for the assessment year 2017-18.
We find that this appeal is filed with a delay of 97 days. The assessee filed an affidavit for condonation of delay stating the reasons. Upon hearing both the parties and on examination of the said affidavit, we find the reasons stated by the assessee are bonafide, which really prevented in filing the appeal in time. Thus, the delay is condoned and admitted the appeal for adjudication.
The assessee raised 4 grounds of appeal amongst which, the only issue emanates for our consideration as to whether the ld. CIT(A) is justified in confirming the order of the Assessing Officer in the facts and circumstances of the case.
4. At the outset, we note that the Assessing Officer made addition by holding that the assessee could not submit details of Members during the course of assessment proceedings. We note that the said details are filed before us by placing on record consisting of 15 pages. The ld. AR Shri T.S. Lakshmi Venkataraman, F.C.A. also filed a petition to admit the same by way of additional evidence under Rule 29 of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963. The ld. DR Shri C. Sivakumar, Addl. CIT vehemently opposed the same and submits that there is no clarity in the list provided by the assessee.
5. On perusal of the assessment order, we note that the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to furnish the details of Members to whom credit facilities are extended and break-up of such details of Ordinary Members and Nominal Members, but, however, the assessee did not furnish the Members list during the course of assessment proceedings, which is clear from para 4.3 & 4.4 of the assessment order. Taking into consideration of the same and in the interest of justice, the petition for admission of addition evidence is allowed and consequently, the Assessing Officer is directed to consider the said list of Members and pass the order accordingly. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 26th August, 2025 at Chennai.