2024 (2) TMI 1374 - AT - Income Tax

Condonation of delay - delay of 39 days days in filling appeal before ITAT - scope of sufficient cause for delay - HELD THAT - In the present case, the delay of 39 days cannot be simply condoned on the basis of the unsubstantiated claim of the assessee. In fact, the conduct of the assessee before the A.O and the CIT(Appeals) clearly evidences his disregard for the process of law, which, we find, he had carried forward before me by preferring the appeal beyond a period of 39 days after the lapse of the stipulated time period. Also, as observed in the case of Ramlal, Motilal and Chotelal Vs. Rewa Coalfields Ltd. 1961 (5) TMI 54 - SUPREME COURT that seeker of justice must come with clean hands, therefore, now when in the present appeals the assessee appellant had failed to come forth with any good and sufficient reason that would justify condonation of the delay involved in preferring the captioned appeal, therefore, decline to condone the delay of 39 days and, thus, without adverting to the merits of the case dismiss appeal of the assessee as barred by limitation. Assessee appeal dismissed.

Summary

Issues Involved:
1. Contravention of provisions of section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
2. Validity of the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
3. Confirmation of addition of Rs. 34,09,870/- under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
4. Condonation of delay in filing appeals.

Summary:

Issue 1: Contravention of provisions of section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961
The assessee argued that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in passing the order in contravention of section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Tribunal noted that despite multiple notices, the assessee did not participate in the proceedings before the CIT(Appeals). The CIT(Appeals) dismissed the appeal after considering the material available on record.

Issue 2: Validity of the order passed by the Assessing Officer under section 144 of the Income-tax Act, 1961
The assessee contended that the Assessing Officer (A.O) passed the order under section 144 without providing a reasonable opportunity and without providing reasons recorded under section 148(2) of the Act. The Tribunal observed that the A.O issued several notices, which were not complied with by the assessee. Consequently, the A.O treated the cash deposits of Rs. 34,09,866/- as unexplained money under section 69A and determined the income accordingly.

Issue 3: Confirmation of addition of Rs. 34,09,870/- under section 69A of the Income-tax Act, 1961
The assessee challenged the addition of Rs. 34,09,870/- as unexplained cash credit. The Tribunal upheld the CIT(Appeals) decision, noting that the assessee failed to provide any tangible material or evidence to explain the source of the deposits during both the assessment and appellate proceedings.

Issue 4: Condonation of delay in filing appeals
The assessee sought condonation of a 39-day delay in filing the appeal for the assessment year 2013-14 and a 166-day delay for the assessment year 2014-15. The Tribunal found the reasons for the delay unconvincing and noted the assessee's lackadaisical conduct. The Tribunal emphasized that condoning such delays without plausible explanations would set a wrong precedent. Therefore, the Tribunal declined to condone the delays and dismissed both appeals as barred by limitation.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal dismissed both appeals for the assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15, citing the assessee's failure to provide sufficient cause for the delays and lack of participation in the proceedings before the lower authorities. The additions made by the A.O under section 69A were upheld.