9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (7) TMI 62X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... all the fact that the assessment order passed by the AO was completely devoid of any reasoning whatsoever. Despite the assessee providing all the documentary evidence as required by the AO and the fact that notice u/s. 133(6) having also been complied with. Hence, the reasoning stated by the AO in making the 100% addition is completely bereft of any reasoning whatsoever. He has mentioned that after considering the overall facts and circumstances, he is making 100% addition. In our considered opinion this is not any reasoning whatsoever. Hence, assessee belief that he will succeed in the alternative remedy cannot be brushed aside. In these circumstances, in our considered opinion, the delay of filing appeal before the Ld.CIT(A) was on accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as is called for on the facts and in the circumstances of the case of the appellant and in law. 6. That each of the grounds of appeal enumerated above is without prejudice to and independent of one another. 3. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of exporter of pharmaceuticals products, cotton surgical dressings. The AO has made 100% addition on account of bogus purchases by holding as under:- 2. ' This case was reopened on the basis of information received from Addl, DIT(Inv), Unit-I, Mumbai regarding information on beneficiaries in the cases of Rajendra Jain and Kamal Kishore Rathi. On examination it is found that DILIP K KAPADIA has taken accommodation entries from NAZAR during the F.Y, 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Dilip K. Kapadia. 7. In view of the above, considering overall facts and circumstances of the case as narrated above and also taking into consideration it is hereby held that the assessee could not produce the party for verification and thereby could not justify the genuineness of the transaction. Consequently assessee has suppressed profits in lieu of inflated purchases to the tune of ₹ 2,39, 148/- being 100% of alleged purchases of ₹ 2,39,148/- for the F.Y. 2007-08, relevant to A.Y. 2008-09 and the same is accordingly added back to the total income of the assessee. Penalty proceedings u/s. 271(1)(c) are separately initiated for furnishing inaccurate particulars of income and for concealing the income. 4. From the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the matter is that no reasonable and due cause has been demonstrated before me so as to persuade me to condone this huge delay of more than 900 days in filling of the present appeal. 5.6 Further, I observe that in the present case it is not a question of a delay of 10 or 15 days or even 100 or 500 days. The delay is almost running into a whopping 934 days. If such a huge delay is condoned, in that case, the statutory limits for filing of the appeals will be rendered totally useless and would become a standing joke. 5.7 In the circumstances therefore, I do not find that any case of sufficient cause has been successfully made by the appellant, which can be attributed to this huge and inordinate delay of 934 days in filing of the said a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
