TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (6) TMI 569
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessee has taken the following grounds of appeals:- "1. The Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax, (Appeals) - 13, Ahmedabad [hereinafter referred to as "Ld. A.O." erred in passing the assessment order dismissing the appeal filled by the appellant u/s. 246A of the Act the Income Tax Act, 1961 [hereinafter referred to as 'Act'] by determining total Assessed Income of the Appellant at Rs. 8,83,030/- without appreciating the facts and circumstances of the case. 2. During the course of assessment we have provided all the relevant submission to the Ld. A.O. 3. The Appellant is an individual, NRI staying in Abu Dhabi, UAE since 2008 holding UAE Residence Visa. Having NRI status in the A.Y. 2012-13, the Appellant was....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....receipt. 10. Thus, the Income considered by the Ld. A.O. is not at all justified and the same may be deleted. 11. The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, rescind or amend any of the Grounds and submission of further additional documents." 3. At the outset, we observe that the appeal is time-barred by 405 days. Before us, the counsel for the assessee submitted that the date of service or communication of the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) was 30-10-2020, and therefore, the appeal was time-barred owing to the Covid pandemic. We note that the assessee company received the order of Ld. CIT(Appeals) on 30-10-2020. However, in view of the nation-wide lockdown from 24th March 2020, the Apex Court in Cognizance for Extension of Li....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ing, all persons shall have a limitation period of 90 days from 1-3- 2022; in event actual balance period of limitation remaining, with effect from 1-3-2022, is greater than 90 days, that longer period shall apply In view of the above, since the delay of 405 days in filing appeal is falling within the Covid pandemic period, the delay is hereby being condoned. 4. On merits, the brief facts of the case are that assessee had not filed return of income u/s 139 (1) of the Act and therefore, notice under section 148 was issued by the Department on 31-03-2019. In response, the assessee filed return of income 01-06-2019, disclosing "Nil" income. During the course of assessment, the assessing officer observed that the assessee had sold shares of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... not produced before the AO. It is seen that the shares were purchased on various dates in January 2011 and sold on various dates in April 2011 (and to this extent the appellant was not correct in stating during the assessment proceedings that the shares were held for more than 12 months) and that there was loss of Rs. 56,664.59. The statement does not cover the details of payments made to ICICI Securities Ltd. for purchase of the shares and no evidence has been filed as to the sources of funds for purchases of those shares. It is also not clear as to whether the appellant has other purchases and sales of other shares during the year and in other years. It is thus not possible to determine whether the transactions have taken to be business ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rough salary income earned by the assessee from Punj Lloyd. Accordingly, the source of investment in such shares was duly explained. Further, the counsel for the assessee also furnished before us details of shares purchased and sold along with capital loss working (refer page 49 of the paper book). Accordingly, the counsel for the assessee submitted that both the source of investment was duly explained (which was salary income earned by the assessee as General Manager with Punj Lloyd in Malaysia) and also that during the year under consideration the assessee had incurred short-term capital loss of Rs. 56,664/- on sale of shares of Infosys Tech. Further, the counsel for the assessee submitted that in the instant facts, Ld. CIT(Appeals) also ....