9911796707
Advanced Search 
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 1339X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Income fax (Appeals) is bad in Law and therefore needs to be quashed. 2. On the basis of facts and circumstances & legal position of the case, the order u/s 250 passed by the Hon'ble Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is against the principle of natural justice. 3. On the basis of facts and circumstances & legal position of the case, the Hon'ble Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the appeal was filed late as the Ld. Assessing officer on 27.06.2019 i.e. after approximate 120 days, verbally confirmed to the appellant that the application U/s 154 cannot be rectified from their end and should file an appeal against it, 4. On the basis of facts and circumstances & legal position of the case, th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 3(3) of the Act was completed at an income of Rs. 12,21,744/-. During the course of assessment the AO noticed that the assessee had made payment amounting to Rs. 19,87,429/- and no tax had been deducted. Therefore, he made addition of Rs. 1,05,174/- by invoking the provisions of Section 40(a)(ia) read with Section 194 of the Act. Further, the AO noticed that there were cash payments exceeding Rs. 20,000/-. Therefore, he invoking the provisions of Section 40A(3) made addition of Rs. 4,46,800/- and assessed income at Rs. 12,21,744/-. Aggrieved against this the assessee carried the matter before learned CIT(A), who dismissed the appeal in limine on the ground of limitation. Aggrieved against this the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income tax Act, 1961 read with Faceless Appeal Scheme 2020 Paragraph 5(1 )(ii)(b)." 5.1. The Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector, Land Acquisition, Anantnag & Anr. Vs. Mst. Katiji & Ors. 167 ITR 471 (SC) has observed that the legislature has conferred power to condone delay by enacting section 5 of the Limitation Act, 1963, in order to enable the courts to do substantial justice to parties by disposing of matters on merits and "every day's delay must be explained" does not imply a pedantic approach. The doctrine must be applied in a rational, common sense and pragmatic manner. Further, the Hon'ble Apex Court has observed as under: "When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cau ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ontention of the assessee that the AO has wrongly made addition on account of non-furnishing of Form 28 and making cash payments exceeding rupees twenty thousand. The contention of the assessee is that the AO had wrongly invoked the provisions of Section 40A(3) as n cash payment was exceeding rupees twenty thousand to a single individual. The learned CIT(A) without examining this issue dismissed the appeal purely on the ground of limitation. However, in the light of the binding precedence I am of the considered view that learned CIT(A) ought to have examined the correctness of contention of the assessee that the impugned additions have been wrongly made. Therefore, looking to the totality of facts, I hereby condone the delay in filing the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
