Appeal dismissed as time-barred after 137-day delay despite assessee's claim of email oversight

ITAT Raipur dismissed the assessee's appeal as time-barred due to a 137-day delay in filing. The assessee claimed the delay occurred because they failed to check their email where the CIT(Appeals) NFAC order was delivered. The tribunal found this reason unsubstantiated and noted the assessee's disregard for legal processes. Citing the principle that seekers of justice must come with clean hands, the tribunal refused to condone the substantial delay without sufficient justification and dismissed the appeal on limitation grounds without examining the merits.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Bogus Purchases
2. Rejection of Books of Accounts
3. Delay in Filing Appeal

Summary:

Issue 1: Bogus Purchases
The assessee, engaged in rice milling and trading, declared an income of Rs. 8,02,440/- for the assessment year 2014-15. During assessment, the A.O identified purchases worth Rs. 82,75,000/- from four parties as 'bogus purchases' based on a survey operation u/s. 133A revealing that certain rice millers procured bogus bills without actual purchases. The A.O observed that the assessee failed to substantiate the genuineness of these purchases with supporting documentary evidence, such as delivery challans. Consequently, the A.O treated the entire purchase amount as bogus.

Issue 2: Rejection of Books of Accounts
Following the identification of bogus purchases, the A.O rejected the assessee's books of accounts u/s. 145(3) of the Act. Relying on the ITAT, Ahmadabad's decision in Vijay Proteins Vs. ACIT, the A.O disallowed 25% of the bogus purchase value, adding Rs. 20,68,750/- to the assessee's income. Additionally, the A.O made further additions of Rs. 1,00,000/- for freight and hamali expenses and Rs. 50,000/- for wages expenses, determining the total income at Rs. 30,21,190/-.

Issue 3: Delay in Filing Appeal
The assessee appealed against the CIT(Appeals) decision, which was dismissed in limine due to non-appearance on multiple occasions and failure to submit supporting details. The appeal to the Tribunal was filed with a delay of 137 days. The assessee attributed the delay to inadvertently failing to check his email for the CIT(Appeals) order. However, the Tribunal found the explanation unconvincing and indicative of a lackadaisical approach. Citing precedents, the Tribunal emphasized that the law of limitation must be construed strictly and declined to condone the delay, dismissing the appeal as barred by limitation.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal upheld the A.O's decision on bogus purchases and rejection of books of accounts, and dismissed the appeal due to the inordinate and unexplained delay in filing. The appeal was pronounced dismissed on November 6, 2023.

---