TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1248
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ays in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal deserves to be condoned. 4. The AR has submitted that the assessee, being an illiterate person, was not conversant with the legal intricacies and procedural requirements for filing an appeal before the Tribunal, and on this ground, the delay may be condoned. 5. On the other hand, the Ld. DR has strongly opposed the condonation of delay and submitted that the assessee is a habitual litigant. It was pointed out that in the earlier round of proceedings, the Tribunal had restored the matter to the file of the learned PCIT with a specific direction to the assessee to appear and cooperate in the proceedings; however, the assessee failed to comply with such directions. It was thus contende....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see, as emanating from the record, reflects a pattern of negligence and lack of due diligence rather than a bona fide inability to act within the prescribed period. 6.3 In light of the foregoing facts and circumstances, we are of the considered view that the assessee has not been able to establish the existence of "sufficient cause" for condonation of the delay of 132 days in filing the present appeal. Consequently, the delay is declined to be condoned. 6.4 However, notwithstanding the dismissal of the application for condonation of delay, we proceed to examine and adjudicate the issues involved in the appeal on merits as well. 7. In the present appeal Assessee has raised the following grounds: 1. That in the facts and cir....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h deposits amounting to Rs. 1,08,60,000/- in the assessee's bank account during the relevant previous year. 9. On examination of the assessment records, the learned Pr. CIT observed that the Assessing Officer had accepted the explanation of the assessee regarding the source of cash deposits, stated to be arising from sale of land, without making proper enquiries and verification. It was noticed that though an agreement to sell was placed on record, there was no evidence of execution of the sale deed or receipt of full consideration and the source of the balance amount of Rs. 83,60,000/- remained unverified. Accordingly, the learned Pr. CIT invoked jurisdiction under section 263 of the Act, holding that the assessment order was errone....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hus submitted that the assessee does not deserve any indulgence. 13. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. It is an undisputed fact that the assessee failed to comply with the notices issued by the learned Pr. CIT did not place any material on record during the revisionary proceedings. Therefore, the learned Pr. CIT had no occasion to examine the assessee's claim in detail. 13.1 On merits, we find that the assessee claims to have received consideration exceeding Rs. 1 crore, whereas the registered sale deed reflects consideration of Rs. 52,00,000/- only. The Assessing Officer, while completing the assessment, has accepted the explanation of the assessee primarily on the basis of oral sta....