Tribunal partially allows appeal, condones delay, reduces adhoc expenses, and directs deletion of addition.

The appeal was partly allowed by the Tribunal. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned with a cost imposed on the assessee. The adhoc disallowance of expenses was reduced from 5% to a fixed amount of Rs. 1 lakh. Additionally, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition related to the advance of Rs. 3 lakhs received against the sale of property, as it was returned to the buyer.

---

---

Issues involved:
1. Delay in filing the appeal and condonation of delay.
2. Adhoc disallowance of expenses.
3. Assessment of advance of Rs. 3 lakhs received against the sale of property.

Issue 1: Delay in filing the appeal and condonation of delay:
The appeal was filed 302 days beyond the limitation period due to the assessee's relocation and business closure. The chartered accountant received the order from the CIT(A) late, leading to the delay. The Tribunal acknowledged a reasonable cause for the delay but imposed a cost of Rs. 5,000 on the assessee, which was paid, and thus, the delay was condoned.

Issue 2: Adhoc disallowance of expenses:
The assessee claimed an expenditure of Rs. 36,66,955, with the Assessing Officer making an adhoc disallowance of 10%, later reduced to 5% by the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted that the assessee failed to provide evidence of the expenses claimed and did not appear before the Assessing Officer. While the CIT(A) had fully deleted a similar disallowance in the previous year, the Tribunal found that the addition of 5% of expenses, around Rs. 1.80 lakhs, was excessive. Thus, the Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to restrict the addition to Rs. 1 lakh only.

Issue 3: Assessment of advance of Rs. 3 lakhs received against the sale of property:
The assessee received Rs. 3 lakhs as an advance against the sale of a property, which was later returned to the buyer due to the non-approval of a bank loan. The Assessing Officer assessed the entire sale amount as income, but the CIT(A) directed the assessment of only the advance amount. The Tribunal observed that the advance was returned and not retained by the assessee, following which the addition of Rs. 3 lakhs was deemed unjustified. Consequently, the Tribunal instructed the Assessing Officer to delete the addition.

In conclusion, the appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal condoning the delay, modifying the adhoc disallowance of expenses, and directing the deletion of the addition related to the advance received against the sale of property.

---

---