Tribunal allows appeal citing sufficient cause, dismisses jurisdiction challenge, sets aside Section 68 addition.

The Tribunal condoned the delay in filing the appeal, citing "sufficient cause" and referencing relevant case law. The challenge to the jurisdiction of the Assessing Officer was dismissed due to the failure to raise objections timely. The addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act was set aside as the genuineness of the gift was adequately explained. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeal on merits and pronounced the order on 04/08/2023.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Condonation of Delay
2. Jurisdiction of Assessing Officer
3. Addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act

Condonation of Delay:
The appeal was time-barred by 246 days. The assessee claimed the delay was due to incorrect advice from their previous counsel. The Tribunal noted that "sufficient cause" for condonation should receive a liberal construction to advance substantial justice, as per the Supreme Court's ruling in State of West Bengal v. Administrator, Howrah Municipality. The Tribunal also referenced the Mumbai ITAT case of Sterlite Industries (India) Ltd., emphasizing that the length of delay is immaterial if the explanation is acceptable. Given the bona fide reasons presented, the Tribunal condoned the delay.

Jurisdiction of Assessing Officer:
The assessee argued that the assessment order was void ab initio as it was passed by an officer not in charge of the Central Range, violating CBDT Instruction No. 8 dated 14-08-2002. The Tribunal cited several cases, including Bhupindra Food & Malt Industries and Hindustan Transport Co., which held that objections to jurisdiction must be raised within the time limits specified in Section 124(3) of the Act. Since the assessee did not raise the jurisdictional issue during the assessment or appellate proceedings, the Tribunal dismissed the additional ground.

Addition under Section 68 of the Income Tax Act:
The AO observed an increase in the assessee's capital and questioned the genuineness of a gift from the assessee's mother. The AO treated the gift as unexplained cash credit due to discrepancies in the gift deed. The CIT(A) upheld this view, noting the joint account from which the gift was made. However, the Tribunal found that the gift deed was supported by multiple bank transfers made before the search and issuance of notice under Section 153A. The Tribunal concluded that the assessee reasonably explained the gift's source and set aside the addition.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal condoned the delay, dismissed the jurisdictional challenge, and allowed the appeal on merits, setting aside the addition under Section 68. The order was pronounced in open court on 04/08/2023.

---