TMI Blog2017 (3) TMI 1801X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... st addition was made by the Assessing Officer on the basis of Page No.122B of Bundle No.A-9 of Party No.A-12 relating to Assessment Year 2000 - 01. The said addition was deleted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) vide order passed under Section 154 of the Act. The second addition which was made the assessee had not filed the return of income for the said Assessment Year and only on the basis of trial balance net profit was worked out on ₹ 3,39,073/-. The assessee claims that the said net profit is subsumed in the profit of ₹ 16,20,674/- and once the same is deleted then no other addition is to be made. Second plea raised by the assessee was that the perusal of the document itself would reflect that it is part of trial balance and the said figure is shown as the opening balance as on 01.04.2000. It was also stressed by the Learned Authorised Representative for the assessee that the documents on the basis of which the said addition was not made available to the assessee, though, repeated requests were made to the Assessing Officer in this regard. The scope of rectification is limited to correct any mistake which is apparent from the record. The submissio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion application ought to have been accepted and the addition of ₹ 339073 made in the block assessment and confirmed by CIT(A) in his order dt 30.01.2013 ought to be deleted. 4. The assessee in ITA No.2658/PUN/2016 has raised the following grounds of appeal : 1. The Hon. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 339073 made in Assessment Year 01-02 by the AO based on trial balance as on 31.03.2001 being seized document at Pg. No. 121 Bundle No A-9 Party A-12. found in search action on 27.06.2002. 2. The appellant pleads that the amount of ₹ 3,39,073 pertained to YE 31.03.2000 and arose out of tentative accounts based on projected sale of property for consideration of ₹ 26,40,000 jotted in seized document no 122B Bundle No A-9 Party A-12. 3. The Hon CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that the figure of ₹ 3,39,073 in the Trial Balance was consequential to the estimated profit of ₹ 16,26,074 from the projected sale of property for ₹ 26,40,000 which was held by CIT(A) as not a real transaction and that no real income was earned from the sale. 4. The AO and Hon CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the profit figure of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ining one addition of ₹ 3,39,073 made by the AO in block assessment. The relief granted to the company has not been contested by the Department. The addition of ₹ 3,39,073 represented a consequential addition which arose from a projected profit of ₹ 16,20,674 arising out of a proposed sale of property for ₹ 26,40,000. The CIT(A) in Ground No 5 of the said appeal in the Appellate Order has held that the sale transaction is not a real transaction resulting in any income. As legally advised, the company preferred an application u/s 154 seeking rectification of the order pointing out the aforesaid facts. The said application was rejected by the CIT(A) resulting in the addition of ₹ 3,39,073 being contested in appeal before the ITAT 'A' Bench, Pune in ITA No. 2073/PN/2014. In the course of preparation for hearing of the appeal before the ITAT we feel that we have pursued our grievance about the addition of ₹ 3,39,073 before a wrong forum whereby the present appeal is against order under Section 154 and not against the addition of ₹ 3,39,073 on merits. The company is aggrieved by the addition of ₹ 3,39,073 and has filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x (Appeals) the assessee did not seek the alternate remedy of filing an appeal before the Tribunal against the addition of ₹ 3,39,073/-, which was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However once the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had disposed of the said plea of the assessee and decided the same against the assessee, the course of action for filing the appeal before the Tribunal should have been initiated immediately. However the assessee files the appeal as late as on 22.11.2016, whereas the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) under Section 154 of the Act was passed on 17.10.2014. The assessee has failed to explain the delay between October - 2014 to November 2016. Undoubtedly a pragmatic view has to be taken while deciding the appeals relating to condonation of delay, but the onus is upon the assessee to explain the delay in filing the appeal late. In the absence of assessee discharging his onus, there is no merit in the plea of the assessee before us. 9. The Hon ble Supreme Court in Collector, Land Acquisition V/s. MST. Katiji Ors reported in 167 ITR 0471 has held as under: 3. The legislature has conferred the power to condo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2395 of 2008 had considered the case of delay of 90 days and had held that in case where the delay was not huge, the same could have been condoned without putting the respondent to harm or prejudices. Applying the above principle, we dismiss the condonation application filed by assessee. Accordingly, the appeal filed by the assessee in ITA No.2658/PUN/2016 is dismissed on preliminary issue itself. 14. Now coming to the appeal filed by the assessee against the order under Section 154 of the Act, the Learned Authorised Representative for the assessee pointed out that certain additions were made in the hands of the assessee on the basis of documents found during the course of search. One addition on account of sale of property at ₹ 16,20,674/- which was made for the Assessment Year 2000 01, the Learned Authorised Representative for the assessee pointed out that the said addition has been deleted by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) vide order passed under Section 154 of the Act. He further pointed that another addition was made to the extent of ₹ 3,39,073/- which was also on the basis of the documents found. He stressed that the said addition related to Assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
