2012 (12) TMI 446 - AT - Income Tax

Delay in filing of appeal before Tribunal u/s 253 Condonation of delay of 449 days Order passed by CIT (A) on dated 17/2/2010 On 01/04/2010 assessee filed rectification application u/s. 154 - Inspite of repeated reminders, no response was received from the CIT(A) Held that - As the appeal was filed on 17.8.2011 before Tribunal, thus resulting into a delay of 449 days. Considering the facts brought on record, in the form of affidavit, the assessee was prevented by reasonable and sufficient cause for not filing the appeal within the period of 60 days as per Section 253 . Therefore, the delay is condoned and appeal is admitted. Issue in favour of assessee Addition on account of difference in vendors accounts AO made addition of 25% of purchase Held that - As concluding from the facts of the case and considering the above finding of the AO in the remand report. There is no substance in the finding of the CIT(A) as the AO himself has accepted the genuineness of the purchases alongwith reconciliation. Their remains no reason for the addition. Issue decides in favour of assessee

Summary

Issues Involved:
Delay in filing appeal, Condonation of delay, Addition of purchases, Remand report findings

Delay in filing appeal:
The appellant filed an appeal against the order of Ld. CIT(A) after a delay of 449 days. The appellant explained the reasons for the delay, citing non-response from Ld. CIT(A) despite reminders and being an NRI who often stays abroad. The Ld. Counsel requested condonation of the delay, which was supported by the fact that the Ld. Departmental Representative did not contest the reasons presented. The Tribunal, after considering the facts presented in the affidavit, concluded that the appellant had reasonable and sufficient cause for the delay and thus condoned the delay, admitting the appeal.

Addition of purchases:
The appellant contended that the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming the addition of 25% of purchases made from two parties, Pam Pac Machines Pvt. Ltd. and Ajas Components, without considering the remand report submitted by the AO. The AO had added a significant amount as bogus purchases after discrepancies were noted in the confirmation of purchases from these parties. However, during the remand proceedings, the AO accepted the genuineness of the purchases and reconciled the differences. The Tribunal observed that the AO's findings in the remand report indicated that the purchases were genuine and reconciled, leading to the deletion of the additions made by the Ld. CIT(A) in respect of these two parties.

Remand report findings:
The AO, in the remand report, confirmed the genuineness of purchases made from Pam Pac Machines Pvt. Ltd. and Ajas Components after thorough verification and reconciliation of the transactions. The report detailed how discrepancies were resolved by matching purchase bills, export invoices, bank statements, and ledger accounts. The Tribunal noted that the AO's findings in the remand report contradicted the additions made by the Ld. CIT(A), as the purchases were found to be genuine and reconciled. Consequently, the Tribunal deleted the additions based on the findings of the remand report, allowing the appeal filed by the assessee in this regard.

---