Hafizullah Farukh Chaudharr Vs ITO (ITAT Mumbai)
In a significant relief to the assessee, the Mumbai ITAT set aside orders of the CIT(A) dismissing appeals solely on the ground of 179-day delay and restored the matters for fresh adjudication, observing that the assessee deserves one more opportunity in the interest of justice and fair play.
The assessee’s appeals for AYs 2020-21 and 2022-23 were dismissed by the CIT(A) after rejecting the application for condonation of delay without adjudicating the issues on merits. The additions challenged included alleged unexplained cash payments u/s 69C, alleged unexplained investment in immovable property u/s 69, and related additions towards stamp duty and registration expenses, all taxed under the harsh provisions of section 115BBE.
Before the Tribunal, the assessee submitted through affidavit that he was not well versed with income-tax laws and procedural requirements and had fully relied upon his Chartered Accountant for handling appellate proceedings. It was explained that the assessee was under a bona fide belief that appeals had been filed within time, and only upon receipt of the CIT(A)’s orders did he discover that the previous CA had filed the appeals belatedly.
The CIT(A) had rejected the condonation request by holding that the explanation furnished by the assessee was vague and reflected lack of due diligence.
