9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (5) TMI 1075X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x Act, 1961 (hereinafter also as called 'The Act') were conducted in the business of the appellant on 11.03.2019. The Return of Income was revised on 31.03.2019 at a total income of Rs. 38,96,920/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (AO) vide order dated 28.08.2021 passed u/s. 143(3) at a total income of Rs. 38,18,920/-. The assessed income includes addition of Rs. 9,80,780/- on account of unexplained investments as discussed vide para 12 of the assessment order. The income was assessed to tax based on the admission made by the assessee during the course of survey proceedings. The AO also brought to tax the said amount under the provisions of section 115BBE of the Act. 3. Being aggriev ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eit the explanation offered by the appellant in support of the reasons for the delay in filing the appeal. It cannot be said that the appellant had obtained any undue advantage out of the delay in filing the present appeal. As observed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Sitaldas K. Motwani v. DGIT 323 ITR 223 (Bom), when substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred for the other side cannot claim to have a vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. There is no presumption that delay is occasioned deliberately, or on account of culpable negligence, or on account of malafides. Therefore, keeping in mind the ab ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts and circumstances, the provisions of section 69 cannot be invoked for the year under consideration. The question of offering any explanation in support of the source for the acquisition of the said assets does not arise for the year under consideration as said investment was not made during the previous year relevant to the assessment year under consideration. Therefore, the reasoning adopted by the CIT(A) is totally contrary to the settled position of law, which cannot be appreciated/sustained. The orders of the lower authorities are hereby set-aside. I therefore direct the AO to delete the addition of Rs. 9,80,780/-. 9. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced on this 20th day of May, 20 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
