9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (5) TMI 843X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Goplani, Advocate. In absence of corroborative and supporting evidence, no justification for making addition on account of long term capital gains. Appeal of assessee allowed. - ITA No.361/SRT/2022 - - - Dated:- 18-5-2023 - Shri Pawan Singh, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Jaikishan Goel, C.A For the Revenue : Shri Vinod Kumar, Sr-DR ORDER UNDER SECTION 254(1) OF INCOME TAX ACT PER PAWAN SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER: 1. This appeal by assessee is directed against the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi [for short to as NFAC/Ld.CIT(A) ] dated 25.08.2022 for assessment year 2013-14, which in turn arises from the addition made by the Income Tax Officer, Ward-1(3)(3), Surat / Assessing Officer in ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... esent appeal was filed on 05.12.2022, thus, there is delay of thirty-eight days in filing appeal before Tribunal. The assessee has filed an application for condonation of such delay. The Ld. Authorized Representative (Ld.AR) for the assessee submits that delay in filing appeal was neither intentional nor deliberate on the part of assessee but due to bona fide reason that assessee was trying to contract Advocate, on whom survey action was carried out, wherein unsigned satakat in the name of assessee and purchases of immovable property was found. The assessee despite making efforts could not trace the said Advocate, namely, Vasudev Goplani. Before filing appeal, the assessee intents to ascertain the real fact and to raised grounds of appeal. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the facts that delay is only of 38 days and the assessee is not likely to get any benefit in filing appeal belatedly. Considering the fact that when technical consideration and cause of substantial justice are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice must be preferred. Hence, the facts of delay of 38 days in filing of appeal is condoned. Now adverting the merit of the case. 5. Rival submission of both the parties on merits and perused the order of lower authorities carefully. The Ld. AR for the assessee submits that case of assessee was reopened on the basis of survey action carried out at the business premises of Vasudev Goplani, Advocate. As per the assertion of assessing officer a satakat was found in the survey ac ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt finding. The ld AR for the assessee prayed for deleting the entire addition. 6. On the other hand, Ld. Sr-DR for the Revenue supported the order of lower authorities and submits that during the survey carried out at the business premises of Vasudev Goplani, Advocate a satakat was found. The details mentioned on such satakat exactly matched with the particulars of the payment made to assessee as mentioned on the conveyance deed of immovable property sold by assessee. If Shri Vasudev Goplani, Advocate was unknown to assessee, what was the reason of such satakat which was found at the business premises of Vasudev Goplani at the time of survey proceedings. The Ld. Sr-DR submits that lower authorities made the addition on appreciation of e ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
