TMI Blog2009 (12) TMI 935X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee in the month of January 2006. During the course of survey operation, the assessee declared a sum of ₹ 1,00,00,000 from the entire venture. According to the learned counsel, the additional income was offered for the asst. year 2006-07. However, the Assessing Officer estimated the profit for the asst. year 2005-06 at 13.34%. According to the learned counsel, when the assessee has offered additional income of ₹ 1,00,00,000, estimation of profit at 13.34% for the asst. year 2005-06 would amount to double addition. Therefore, a situation had arisen to file appeal against the order of the AO for the asst. year 2005-06. According to the learned counsel, the delay in filing the appeal is unintentional and beyond the control of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t of the assessee. Therefore, it could not be condoned. The learned departmental representative further submitted that in case this Tribunal feels that there was reasonable cause on the part of the assessee for the delay in filing the appeal, the matter may be remitted back to the file of the CIT (A) for considering the appeal on merits. 4. We have considered rival submissions on either side and also perused the material available on record. Admittedly, there was a survey in the premises of the assessee in the month of January 2006. The assessee offered additional amount of ₹ 1,00,00,000 for the asst. year 2006-07. The assessee claimed that he was under the bona fide impression that since the additional income of ₹ 1,00,00,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when a person has a good case on merits, defeat of his claim on technical plea of limitation would ultimately lead to injustice. The jurisdictional High Court has also taken note of the observation made by the Apex Court that the State should not stand by a technical plea of limitation if a citizen's case was otherwise meritorious. Ultimately, the Andhra Pradesh High Court condoned the delay. 6. In the case before us also, the assessee offered a sum of ₹ 1,00,00,000 for the asst. year 2006-07 and he was under the bona fide impression that no appeal needs to be filed for the asst. year 2005-06. Only after passing of assessment order for the asst. year 2006-07, the assessee found that the estimation of profit at 13.34% would amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
