TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 335X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sufficient reason in filing the appeal belatedly before this Tribunal. Relying on the Hon ble Supreme Court judgment in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition v. MST. Katiji Ors.,[ 1987 (2) TMI 61 - SUPREME COURT ] we are inclined to condone the delay and admit the appeal for adjudication. Addition u/s 68 or 69A - Deposits into bank accounts - HELD THAT:- When the amounts could not have been added under section 68, the Tribunal was not competent to make the addition under section 69A. That being so, when the Tribunal has no power to sustain addition u/s. 69A of the Act, after deleting it u/s. 68, the same is equally applicable to CIT(Appeals) also. He cannot sustain addition u/s. 69A after deleting it u/s. 68 of the Act. The o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hyper-tension, Diabetes Backpain and was advised rest. More so, the assessee is having physical disability and also residing far from Bangalore at Bidar. Later, the assessee approached the present counsel, Mr. V. Srinivasan, and immediately thereafter within reasonable time the present counsel filed the appeal and thus there was a delay of 158 days in fling the appeal. These are the circumstances for the delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and the ld. counsel for the assessee prayed to condone the delay and admit the appeal, otherwise it would cause unbearable loss to the assessee. 3. The ld. DR strongly opposed to condonation of delay in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. 4. I have heard the parties and perused the r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e. The CIT(Appeals) agreed with the contention of the assessee and deleted the addition made u/s. 68 of the Act, However, he sustained the addition u/s. 69A of the Act. 8. Now the contention of the ld. AR for the assessee before me is that the deposits were made into bank accounts of assessee from earlier withdrawals and the sources were explained and addition u/s. 69A of the Act cannot be made, without giving mandatory notice u/s. 251(2) of the Act which amounts to enhancement of assessment. He relied on the decision of this Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Sri Girish V. Yalakkishettar v. ITO, ITA Nos.354 355/Bang/2019, order dated 27.01.2020. 9. On the other hand, the ld. DR submitted that original addition was made by the AO ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the judgment of Hon ble Allahabad High Court in the case of Smt. Sarika Jain v. CIT, 407 ITR 254 (All), wherein it was held that use of the word thereon is important and it reflects that the Tribunal has to confine itself to the questions which arise or are subject matter in the appeal and it cannot be travelled beyond that. The power to pass such order as the Tribunal thinks fit can be exercised only in relation to the matter that arises in the appeal and it is not open to the Tribunal to adjudicate any other question or an issue, which is not in dispute and which is not the subject matter of the dispute in appeal. Accordingly, when the amounts could not have been added under section 68, the Tribunal was not competent to make the addi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
