Loading judgment…
Facts
Two sets of appeals were filed before the tribunal. The first set by Shilpi Goyal, aggrieved by orders that dismissed her appeals challenging assessment orders for AY 2010-11 and 2012-13. The second set by Sunil Kumar Goyal, also aggrieved by dismissal of his appeals for AY 2010-11 and 2012-13. The second set of appeals were filed beyond the prescribed limitation period.
Held
The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the second set of appeals, finding merit in the explanation provided by the appellant regarding the late filing. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer reopened assessments based on information regarding investments made by the assessees with M/s U B Investment.
Key Issues
Whether the appeals were filed within the period of limitation and whether the Assessing Officer adequately considered the source of investments before passing the assessment orders.
Sections Cited
Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, JODHPUR BENCH (VIRTUAL
Before: Dr. MITHA LAL. MEENA & SHRI NARINDER KUMAR
In view of the above discussion, all the four appeals are disposed off, for statistical purpose and the matters are restored to the files of the Assessing Officer for decision afresh, after providing reasonable opportunity of being heard, and in accordance with law. Order pronounced under Rule 34(4) of the Income Tax (Appellate Tribunal) Rules, 1963 by placing the details on the notice board.