Tribunal affirms Rs. 5,00,000 addition under Income Tax Act. Appeal dismissed, reassessment upheld.

The Tribunal upheld the addition of Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act, as the assessee failed to provide evidence to refute the AO's findings. The delay in filing the appeal was condoned, allowing the case to be heard on merits. The reassessment proceedings were deemed valid, with the Tribunal finding no merit in the assessee's arguments. The appeal was dismissed, affirming the CIT(A)'s order and pronouncing the decision on 13th July 2022.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Condonation of delay in filing the appeal.
2. Addition of Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act on account of unexplained investment.
3. Validity of the reassessment proceedings and the evidence supporting the addition.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Condonation of Delay in Filing the Appeal:
The appeal was filed with a delay of 12 days. The assessee attributed the delay to suffering a loss in the cheque discounting business and relocating to his native place. Upon realizing the need to file an appeal, the assessee returned to Surat, but the stipulated period had lapsed. The Tribunal noted that the delay was neither intentional nor deliberate. The revenue did not seriously oppose the application for condonation of delay. Considering the submissions and the affidavit filed by the assessee, the Tribunal took a liberal view and condoned the delay, allowing the appeal to be heard on merits.

2. Addition of Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 69 of the Income Tax Act:
The case was reopened based on information from the Investigation Wing, Ahmedabad, following a search action on Barter Group. The investigation revealed that the assessee made an investment of Rs. 5,00,000 in shares of M/s Rajendra Suri Financial Services (Gujarat) Pvt. Ltd., which was not disclosed in the regular books of accounts. The Assessing Officer (AO) treated this as an undisclosed investment and made an addition under Section 69. The assessee denied making any investment in shares, claiming the amount was part of his cheque discounting business and earned a commission. However, the AO found no evidence to support this claim, and the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)] upheld the addition due to the lack of any clarifying evidence from the assessee.

3. Validity of the Reassessment Proceedings and Evidence Supporting the Addition:
The reassessment was initiated under Section 147 based on incriminating evidence seized during the search on Barter Group, indicating undisclosed investments. Despite multiple opportunities, the assessee failed to file a return or provide explanations. The AO completed the assessment under Section 144, relying on the seized documents and information. The Tribunal noted that the assessee did not furnish any corroborative evidence to substantiate that the Rs. 5,00,000 was part of the cheque discounting business. The Tribunal also dismissed the alternative plea that the issue was covered by a previous Tribunal decision, as the addition in the current reassessment was based on new incriminating evidence. The Tribunal found no merit in the assessee's submissions and upheld the CIT(A)'s order, confirming the addition under Section 69.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, finding no error or illegality in the CIT(A)'s order. The addition of Rs. 5,00,000 under Section 69 was upheld due to the lack of evidence from the assessee to disprove the findings of the AO and CIT(A). The order was pronounced in the open court on 13th July 2022.

---