Tribunal allows appeal, condones delay due to CA error, deletes undisclosed income addition.

The Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, condoning the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) due to unintentional delay caused by the Chartered Accountant misplacing appeal papers. The Tribunal also deleted the addition of 'un-disclosed income' based on the admission of income in regular returns, citing legal precedents supporting condonation of delay and avoiding double taxation.

---

---

Issues:
Delay in filing appeal before CIT(A), Condonation of delay, Addition of 'un-disclosed income'.

Delay in filing appeal before CIT(A):
The assessee filed an appeal against the order of assessment with a delay of 1895 days. The delay was attributed to the Chartered Accountant who misplaced the appeal papers, leading to the late filing. The assessee argued that there was no malafide intention or willful default, requesting condonation of the delay. The AR highlighted that the income in question was already disclosed in regular returns, causing double taxation and financial injury to the assessee. Various legal precedents, including decisions of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, were cited to support the plea for condonation of delay.

Condonation of delay:
The assessee contended that the delay in filing the appeal was unintentional and requested for condonation. The AR emphasized that the addition made by the AO constituted double taxation of the same income, causing undue hardship to the assessee. The Tribunal, considering the facts and legal arguments presented, opined that technical default in filing the appeal within the time limit should not preclude condonation of delay. Citing the interest of justice, the Tribunal decided to condone the delay, thereby allowing the appeal of the assessee.

Addition of 'un-disclosed income':
The AO had made additions for 'un-disclosed income' for certain assessment years. The assessee had already admitted this income in the regular returns filed for those years. Relying on a previous decision by a Co-ordinate Bench of ITAT in a similar case, the Tribunal set aside the order of the CIT(A) and deleted the addition made by the AO. The Tribunal held in favor of the assessee based on the precedent and the admission of income in the regular returns.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appeal of the assessee, condoning the delay in filing the appeal before CIT(A) and deleting the addition of 'un-disclosed income' based on the admission of income in the regular returns and legal precedents cited during the proceedings.

---