TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 935X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ently, we find that there is no concealment of any material fact by the assessee. At best, it can be said that the claim made by the assessee with respect to the Long Term Capital Loss was an incorrect claim or a wrong claim but it was not a false claim by any measure in as much as there was only a mistake in the legal sense that the gift made by the assessee to the son was considered as a transfer in the computation of income and the resultant figure was shown as a capital loss. It is also a fact on record that the assessee had accepted the same at the time of assessment proceedings. On the facts of the present case, we are of the considered opinion that it is not a case where the particulars of income in relation to which the penalty h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... th the Delay Condonation Application, that the appeal could not be filed within the time as the impugned order and the related papers had been misplaced by the assessee. It was prayed that in the interest of justice, the delay may kindly be condoned and the appeal be admitted for regular hearing. 3. Per contra, the Ld. Sr. DR opposed the application for Condonation of Delay. 4. Having heard both the parties on the issue of Condonation of Delay, in the interest of substantial justice, we condone the delay of 09 days, as it is settled law that no assessee would be benefited by simply delaying the filing of the appeal. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and the appeal is admitted. 5. It is seen from the records that assessee is a part ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ltant of the assessee and, thus, there is no deliberate attempt on the part of the assessee to furnish inaccurate particulars of income. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to consider the fact that as per the binding judgment of Hon'ble Punjab Haryana High Court in the case of Inspecting Assistant Commissioner Vs. Manoj Ahuja 150 ITR 696, wherein, it has been held that no litigant shall suffer on account of the mistake of the counsel. 4. That the Appellant craves leave to add or amend the grounds of appeal before the appeal is finally heard or disposed off. 6. The Ld. Authorised Representative (AR) submitted that no penalty was imposable as the assessee had only made a wrong claim and not a false claim in as much as all t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ugned Long Term Capital Loss, the Long Term Capital Gain came to be reduced by the amount of capital loss so wrongly claimed. The mistake was noticed by the Assessing officer during the course of assessment proceedings and on being confronted on the issue, the assessee surrendered the Long Term Capital Loss. We have also gone through the computation of income filed by the assessee and we see that this amount of capital loss has been duly mentioned in the computation of income. Therefore, apparently, we find that there is no concealment of any material fact by the assessee. At best, it can be said that the claim made by the assessee with respect to the Long Term Capital Loss was an incorrect claim or a wrong claim but it was not a false clai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
