9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (1) TMI 1412X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y to the petitioner to explain the information that was made available to the Authority by the AO. The very fact that the AO had reported the fact of the petitioner taking treatment makes out a prima facie case for the petitioner. That being the case, if the Authority desires to adversely infer based on the information furnished by the AO, then he ought to have put it to the petitioner before rely ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by the 1st respondent, rejecting the petitioner s application for condonation of delay preferred under Section 119(2) (b) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as the Act , for short). 3. Learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that the petitioner is a small business man carrying on the business of transporting the harvested sugar cane to the sugar factories. Tha ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to have set out a satisfactory explanation for the delay in filing the returns. 5. Having heard the learned counsel and after perusing the reasoning assigned in the impugned order, this Court is of the opinion that the Authority ought to have accepted the reasons set out by the petitioner. 6. The case of the petitioner that was canvassed before the Authority was that, he was taking treatmen ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... case, if the Authority desires to adversely infer based on the information furnished by the Assessing Officer, then he ought to have put it to the petitioner before relying upon the said information to infer adversely. 7. In that view of the matter, this Court is of the opinion that the 1st respondent-Authority ought to have disclosed and discussed the gist of the information that had been obta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
