Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 1623 - AT - Income TaxCondonation of delay - delay of 179 days - reasonable cause - Mistake of counsel or wrong advice by counsel - HELD THAT:- Assessee has accepted bonafide advice of the tax consultant who was regularly looking after its tax matters but subsequently other consultant advised for filing appeal. We are of the view that this is a reasonable cause as the assessee’s tax Counsel herewith admitted in her affidavit that she advised not file appeal against revision order. Mistake of counsel or wrong advice by counsel constitutes reasonable cause. Hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal. as regularly looking after its tax matters but subsequently other consultant advised for filing appeal. We are of the view that this is a reasonable cause as the assessee’s tax Counsel herewith admitted in her affidavit that she advised not file appeal against revision order. Mistake of counsel or wrong advice by counsel constitutes reasonable cause. Hence, we condone the delay and admit the appeal. Revision u/s 263 - bogus purchases are not examined or enquired into by AO - assessment farmed by the AO as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue in the event that alleged - HELD THAT:- We also noted that the CIT is of the view that the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue on account of the purchases made from these parties are bogus and if he hold such view, before revising the assessment u/s 263, the CIT ought to have made some inquiry of his own and for instance CIT should have issued noticed u/s 133(6) to the concerned parties or CIT should have examine whether the said parties are declared as hawala parties by Sales Tax Authorities. This indicates that the order of CIT revising the assessment is without application of mind. We find that the assessee has submitted/ produced all the documents before the AO during the course of assessment proceedings namely invoices, given details of stocks, payments were made through the banking channels and subsequently the parties were confirmed the said transaction. Even the assessee has shown sales affected from these purchases and stock tally is matching and in such circumstances the parties cannot be held non-genuine. Hon’ble Bombay High Court in the case of MOIL Ltd. vs. CIT [2017 (5) TMI 258 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] wherein held that if a query is raised during assessment proceedings and if the assessee responds to the said query, merely because the said aspect is dealt with in the assessment would not lead to a conclusion that the AO has not applied his mind to the response of the assessee. Revision order passed by CIT is without any basis and the assessment order does not point out that the same is erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. Even, the CIT could not prove that the assessment order is erroneous or prejudicial to the interest of revenue in the given facts and circumstances of the case. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|