AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 157
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....14. Appellant prays to allow same as liability crystilised in AY 2013-14 3. 3) Learned CIT (A) erred is not allowing sum of Rs. 416600 being commission on sale which was due on full payment received against sales. Appellant prays that payment was received AY 13-14 hence payment of commission became due in AY 13-14 only. Hence prays to Allow same as liability crystilised in AY 2013-14 4. 4) Learned CIT (A) erred in not allowing sum of Rs. 143459 being transport charges liability for which crystilised in AY 13-14 only. Appellant prays to Allow same as liability crystilised in AY 2013-14 2. On perusal of the record, it is seen that this appeal has been filed with a delay of 802 days. The impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) was served upon the assessee on 29.03.2019 and therefore, this appeal was due for filing before 60 days from the date of service of the impugned order i.e. 28.05.2019 whereas this appeal has been filed on 17.08.2021. The Ld. counsel of the assessee filed an affidavit from the Director of the Company wherein he has admitted that the delay was on account of misplacing of the order of the Ld. CIT(A) by one of the employee of the company, who received the order. He....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....act of the surge of the virus on public health and adversities faced by litigants in the prevailing conditions, We deem it appropriate to dispose of the M.A. No. 21 of 2022 with the following directions: i. The order dated 23.03.2020 is restored and in continuation of the subsequent orders dated 08.03.2021, 27.04.2021 and 23.09.2021, it is directed that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall stand excluded for the purposes of limitation as may be prescribed under any general or special laws in respect of all judicial or quasijudicial proceedings. ii. Consequently, the balance period of limitation remaining as on 03.10.2021, if any, shall become available with effect from 01.03.2022. iii. In cases where the limitation would have expired during the period between 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022, notwithstanding the actual balance period of limitation remaining, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 01.03.2022. In the event the actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 01.03.2022 is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply. iv. It is further clarified that the period from 15.03.2020 till 28.02.2022 shall also stan....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ere is a reasonable and sufficient cause on the part of the assessee in not filing the appeal and there is no culpable negligence or malafide on the part of the assessee. Considering the facts of the case, we find that there exists sufficient and reasonable cause for condoning the delay in filing the present appeal. In the light of aforesaid discussion, in exercise of powers u/s 253(5) of the Act, we hereby condone the delay in filing the present appeal and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merit. 6. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income on 30.09.2013 declaring total income of Rs.7,20,91,820/-. The return of income filed by the assessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under the Act were issued and complied with. The Assessing Officer in assessment order dated 08.03.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Act, assessed the total income at Rs.9,13,75,690/- after making certain additions/disallowances. The additions made included prior period expenses of Rs.11,80,816/- and disallowance u/s 14A of Rs.6,51,056/-. On further appeal, the Ld. CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 7. Aggrieved with the additions sustained, the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....us was declared @ 20% after completion of balancesheet and the profit declared for Financial Year 2009-10. The difference is debited to the current year account and hence, the liability is debited to current financial year 2010-11. The bonus was declared in October/November 2010; hence, difference of bonus is paid as ex-gratia to the employee of the company. The contention of the assessee was not accepted by Assessing Officer as the assessee is following the mercantile system of accounting. The Ld. CIT(A) concurred with the finding of Assessing Officer holding that the expenses do not pertain to the year. The assessee has clearly brought out on record that bonus was declared in October/November 2010 and the difference of bonus was paid as exgratia to the employee. The bonus was declared by management of the assessee after completion of the balance-sheet on the profit prevailing for Financial Year 2009-10. Thus, the assessee was entitled to debit the difference from the current Financial Year i.e. 2010-11. 14. The Hon'ble Delhi High Court in case of CIT Vs. Exxon Mobile Lubricants (P) Ltd. (supra) while considering the ground related with Prior Period Expenditure held that wh....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....8.2012 i.e. in AY 2013-14. He submitted that Tax Deducted at Source (TDS) on the same in the financial year corresponding to assessment year 2013-14. 13. The Ld. DR on the other hand, relied on the order of lower authorities. 14. We are of the opinion that evidently when bills were not received by the assessee, though the work was completed in the financial year corresponding to assessment year 2012-13, the liability was crystallized only after the receipt of the bills and therefore, the assessee is justified in claiming the same in the assessment year 2013-14 i.e. current assessment year. The Ground of appeal of the assessee is accordingly allowed. 15. The ground No. 3 of the appeal relate to disallowance of commission on sale amounting to Rs.4,16,600/-. The Ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that this commission was to be paid in connection with sale of Rs.83,32,000/-. The Ld. counsel of the assessee submitted that commission @ 5% was paid to J.K. Industrial Corporation for obtaining sale orders and for recovery of payment. As the sale proceeds was received on 04.08.2011, therefore, the commission on sales was accordingly crystallized in the year under consideration and not....