Appeal Dismissed for Time Bar: Lack of Reasons & Evidence. Upheld under Sec. 68.

The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as unadmitted due to being time-barred, emphasizing the inadequacy of reasons for the delay in filing the appeal and the failure to substantiate the unverified purchases, resulting in the additions being upheld under Sec. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

---

---

Issues:
1. Condonation of delay in filing appeal before the Tribunal.
2. Addition of Rs. 33,61,451 on account of unverified purchases under Sec. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961.

Issue 1: Condonation of Delay in Filing Appeal Before the Tribunal:
The appeal was filed by the assessee against an order dated 6.3.2014 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-IV, Baroda, relating to the assessment year 2009-10. The Registry pointed out a delay of 712 days in filing the appeal, rendering it time-barred. The assessee submitted an affidavit seeking condonation of delay, attributing it to the Accounts Manager leaving the company and the country, resulting in a lack of awareness about the appeal's disposal until the initiation of recovery proceedings. The Tribunal found the reasons provided by the assessee unconvincing, emphasizing the lack of diligence and reasonable cause for the substantial delay. The Tribunal concluded that the delay could not be condoned based on the reasons presented, leading to the dismissal of the appeal as unadmitted due to being time-barred.

Issue 2: Addition of Rs. 33,61,451 on Account of Unverified Purchases under Sec. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961:
The assessee contested the addition made by the assessing officer on account of unverified purchases under Sec. 68 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld the addition after multiple opportunities were granted to the assessee to substantiate the genuineness of the expenses. The CIT(A) noted the appellant's failure to provide confirmations from parties, lack of efforts to establish the genuineness of expenses, and the unwillingness to submit evidence sought by the AO. Despite several chances during assessment and appellate proceedings, the appellant did not adequately support the transactions, leading to the additions being upheld. The CIT(A) directed the deletion of certain amounts where verifications were made and confirmations were filed. Ultimately, the Tribunal observed the laxity in the assessee's conduct during the appellate proceedings and the lack of new material or evidence presented before them. Given the delay in filing the appeal and the insufficiency of reasons provided, the Tribunal declined to condone the delay, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed the appeal as unadmitted due to being time-barred, highlighting the inadequacy of reasons for the delay in filing the appeal and the failure to substantiate the unverified purchases, leading to the additions being upheld.

---