ITAT Chennai: Appeal Allowed for Delay, Discrepancies Found in Undisclosed Share Transactions

The ITAT Chennai allowed the appellant's appeal for statistical purposes, condoning a 225-day delay in filing the appeal due to valid reasons, emphasizing the inapplicability of the concept of vested right in income-tax proceedings. The ITAT found discrepancies in the undisclosed share transactions, remitting the issue back to the Assessing Officer for reexamination and decision in accordance with the law. The cross-objection of the Revenue was dismissed in this case related to the assessment year 2008-09.

---

---

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal before ITAT
2. Merits of the appeal regarding undisclosed share transactions

Condonation of Delay:
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) for the assessment year 2008-09, with a delay of 225 days. The appellant claimed that the delay was due to residing outside the country, misplacement of the order copy by the power of attorney holder, and subsequent death of the holder. The appellant, being a non-resident, argued that he was unable to file returns within the prescribed time limit. The Departmental Representative opposed the condonation, relying on a judgment of the Madras High Court. The ITAT observed that no counter affidavit was filed by the Revenue and deemed the cross-objection filed by the Revenue as not maintainable. Considering the circumstances, the ITAT condoned the delay, emphasizing that the concept of vested right is not applicable in income-tax proceedings, and admitted the appeal.

Merits of the Appeal:
Regarding the undisclosed share transactions leading to the reopening of assessment under Section 147 of the Income-tax Act, the appellant contended that the figures mentioned by the CIT(Appeals) were incorrect, and the Assessing Officer did not compute the capital gain accurately. The Departmental Representative argued that the capital gain from the share transactions was not disclosed, justifying the reassessment. The ITAT found that the share transactions were not disclosed by the appellant, and as discrepancies existed in the figures, the matter needed reexamination. Consequently, the ITAT set aside the orders of the lower authorities and remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh examination and decision in accordance with the law. The appeal of the appellant was allowed for statistical purposes, while the cross-objection of the Revenue was dismissed.

This judgment by the ITAT Chennai dealt with the condonation of delay in filing an appeal before the tribunal and the merits of the appeal related to undisclosed share transactions for the assessment year 2008-09. The ITAT, after considering the submissions from both sides, condoned the delay of 225 days, emphasizing the non-applicability of the concept of vested right in income-tax proceedings. On the merits of the appeal, the ITAT found discrepancies in the figures related to share transactions and remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination. The appeal of the appellant was allowed for statistical purposes, while the cross-objection of the Revenue was dismissed.

---