TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2019 (12) TMI 504
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on of delay of 150 days. Ld. Counsel for the assessee reiterated the submissions as made in the application. It is stated that the filing of appeal was assigned to M/s. Ankur Goyal & Company. It is further submitted that Chartered Accountant Gaurav Pandya of Ankur Goyal & Company was looking after the appeal case of the firm, retired from the firm without giving any information of pending files, which were within his knowledge. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee has given an affidavit to this effect. Ld. Counsel further submitted that delay is not attributable to the assessee and there is a reasonable cause. 3. Ld. D.R. opposed these submissions and submitted that the assessee was required to explain the reason for ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ellant(s) on affidavit, cannot arise and for which reason, the High Couirt should have shown indulgence to the appellant(s) by condoning the delay in filing the concerned appeal(s). This aspect has been glossed over by the High Court." Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme court in the case of Senior Bhosale Estate (HUF) Vs. ACIT (supra), I condone delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. 6. Ground Nos.1 & 2 are against reopening of the assessment. Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that assessee is an individual and a trader in purchase and sale of manure through the head office in the name of M/s. Krashi Khad Bhandar. The assessee had filed its original return of income declaring taxable incom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Ld. CIT(A) should have considered the evidences supplied by the assessee and in case he was not satisfied, he should have got it verified from the bank. I therefore, direct the A.O. to delete this addition. 10. Ground Nos.4 & 5 are general in nature and needs no separate adjudication. 11. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed. Order was pronounced in the open court on 10.12.2019. ============= Document 1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case: 1. The Id CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining the assessment order, which is bad-in-law, void-ab-initio, barred by limitation, illegal, contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case, liable to be annulled. 2. Since this is as....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t tax payer. We always follows rules and paid all the taxes but the we condemn this wrong addition without proper grounds so we appeal for dismissal of addition in our income U/s 143(3) r/w/s/148 of Income Tax Act Rs. 157450/- on the facts and circumstances of the case and otherwise it is bad in law. We further wish to quote that similar technical error was considered by CIT(A) Ujjain in the Matter of Shri Vijay Kumar Mittal Prop. Of M/s V.P.Metalica for the assessment year 2010-11. In that authority stated that "The default committed by the assessee was a technical default that the assessee did not deposit the amount meant for reinvestment in the capital gain account scheme before filing return under sectio....