9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (8) TMI 182X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The assessee has filed an application for condonation of delay explaining therein that on receipt of impugned order by Counsel Shri Bhushan Khanduja, the documents were passed on to the office staff for the purpose of preparing appeal memo and filing the appeal. However, at the relevant time, the supervisory staff at the Counsel's chamber was occupied with examinations and for this reason timely compliance could not be made. The application is supported by an Affidavit of Mr. Vikas Batra working with M/s Khanduja and Associates supporting the application. On consideration of the explanation of the assessee, I am of the view assessee was prevented by sufficient cause in not filing the appeal within the period of limitation. Therefore, delay ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee is mercantile and not cash as stated by the AO. It was further stated that in the balance sheet ending 31.03.2014 assessee has shown amount of Rs. 8,50,000/- on credit side as advance fees. The Ld. CIT(A), however, did not accept contention of the assessee because all the columns in the balance sheet of return of income shows "(zero)", except cash in hand. The Ld. CIT(A) noted that it is not in dispute that assessee has received Rs. 8,70,000/- as professional fees in assessment year under appeal which should have been shown in the return of income, therefore, appeal of assessee was dismissed. 5. Ld. Counsel for assessee reiterated the submissions made before authorities below and submitted that assessee is following mercantile system of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment year under appeal. It is submitted that tax would remain same in assessment year under appeal as well as in AY 2020-21. Therefore, it would not make any difference for the Revenue. I accept the explanation of the assessee that amount in question was advance which is now tendered for taxation in AY 2020-21. Therefore, it is merely a tax neutral exercise. It is not a case as if the Revenue has been deprived of any tax. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs. Excel Industries Limited 358 ITR 295 held that "there is no dispute that in subsequent accounting year, the assessee did made import and did derive benefits under the advance license and duties entitlement pass book and paid the tax, therefore, it is not as if the Reve ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
