TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (11) TMI 394
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d without having any basis/ supporting corroborative evidence/ material brought on record, is invalid & is liable to be deleted. 2. The appellant craves leave, to add, urge, alter, modify or withdraw any grounds before or at the time of hearing." 2. Succinctly stated, the assessee who is engaged in the business of rice milling and trading of paddy, rice, broken rice etc. had e-filed his return of income on 13.02.2015 declaring an income of Rs. 8,02,440/-. During the course of assessment proceedings, it was observed by the A.O that the assessee had claimed to have purchased paddy/broken rice from the following four local parties: S. No. Name of the party Total Purchase 1. M/s. Agrawal Agro, Raipur 12,15,000/- 2. M/s. Shrikhand Agro, Raipur 10,95,000/- 3. M/s. Shri Annapurna Foods, Raipur 15,50,000/- 4. M/s. Shri Shyamji Rice Agrotech, Raipur 44,15,000/- Total 82,75,000/- 3. A survey operation u/s. 133A of the Act was conducted at the business premises of Shri Sanjay Sharma, Hanuman market, Raipur and Shri Kamlesh Kesharwani, commission Agent, Ramsagarpara, Raipur on 15.03.2016, which revealed that certain ri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....account. At the same time, the assessee in order to purchase peace of mind offered for tax 10% of the purchases of Rs. 28.25 lacs i.e. Rs. 3,27,500/-. However, A.O did not find fafour with the aforesaid explanation of the assessee. The A.O observed that the invoices of the aforesaid suppliers were not supported by delivery challan. Also the A.O noticed that the modes of inward transport and mandi passage, Anuga etc. were not available with the assessee. Accordingly, the A.O was of the view that as the assessee as in a case where bogus purchase bills were procured, had failed to support his claim of having made genuine purchases from the aforementioned 4 parties by producing delivery challans and also the mode of inward transport, Mandi passage and Anugya etc., therefore, his claim of having made genuine purchases did not merit acceptance. As the assessee had failed to substantiate the authenticity of the purchases claimed to have been made from the aforementioned four parties, therefore, the A.O held the same as bogus purchases. The A.O in the totality of the facts involved in the case held the entire purchase of Rs. 82,75,000/- as bogus. 5. After treating the impugned purchases....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....advertently failed to open his e-mail A/c, wherein the order of the CIT(Appeals), NFAC dated 19.10.2022 was dropped by NFAC. The Ld. AR in support of his aforesaid contention had drawn my attention to an "affidavit" dated 31.05.2023 of the assessee. Elaborating further, it was submitted by the Ld. AR that the assessee had learnt about the order of the CIT(Appeals), NFAC from his Chartered Accountant. It was, thus, submitted by the Ld. AR that as the delay in filing of the present appeal had occasioned for bonafide reasons and not due to any purposive or malafide intent, therefore, the same in all fairness merits to be condoned. 10. I have given a thoughtful consideration on the reasons leading to the delay in filing of the present appeal and am unable to persuade myself to subscribe to the same. Ostensibly, the assessee in the course of the proceedings before the CIT(Appeals) had despite having been afforded sufficient opportunity failed to put up an appearance before him on four occasions when the matter was fixed for hearing, i.e., 01.03.2021, 26.11.2021, 06.01.2022 and 06.05.2022. Also, no details in support of the grounds on the basis of which the impugned order was assailed....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sons. As observed by me hereinabove, as the assessee had remained negligent regarding the process of law even before the first appellate authority by not participating in the proceedings before him and had filed the appeal before me after 137 days, therefore, there appears to be no reason to adopt a liberal view and condone the inordinate delay therein involved. Also, I may observe at this juncture that the law of limitation has to be construed strictly as it has an effect of vesting on one and taking away the right from the other party. The delay in filing of the appeal cannot be condoned in a mechanical or a routine manner since that would undoubtedly jeopardize the legislative intent behind Section 5 of the Limitation Act. 13. I may herein observe that in the case of State of West Bengal Vs. Administrator, Howrah 1972 AIR SC 749, the Hon'ble Apex Court had held that the expression "sufficient cause" should receive a liberal construction so as to advance substantial justice, particularly when there is no motive behind the delay. The expression "sufficient cause" will always have relevancy to reasonableness. The action which can be condoned by the court should fall within the r....