Ravi Kumar Naredi HUF, Bhilwara V. ITO,Ward-3, Bhilwara

ITA 554/JODH/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 103 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 9257 (ITAT-JODHPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 10 month(s) 20 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-10-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: PartlyAllowed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 30-10-2022
• Assessment Year: 2005-2006
• Appeal Filed On: 11-12-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Difference of opinion; Competent authority; Reason to believe; Change of opinion
• Section: 148

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL JODHPUR BENCH, JODHPUR BEFORE SHRI B. R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No. 554/Jodh/2018 (ASSESSMENT YEAR-2005-06) Shri Ravi Kumar Naredi, HUF E-50, Shastri Nagar Bhilwara Vs The ITO Ward-3 Bhilwara (Appellant) (Respondent) PAN NO. AABHR 2014 J Assessee By None Revenue By Shri Venkatesh V (JCIT-DR) Date of hearing 31/10/2022 Date of Pronouncement 1/11/2022 O R D E R PER: SANDEEP GOSAIN, JM This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the ld. CIT(A), Ajmer dated 26-09-2018 for the assessment year 2005-06 raising therein following grounds of appeal. ‘’1. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.9,17,970/- and commission thereon of Rs.18,359/- made by the AO by treating the same as undisclosed income as against long 2 ITA 554/JODH/2018 (RAVI KUMAR NAREDI,HUF VS ITO, WARD 3, BHILWARA term capital gain in sale of equity declared by the assessee. The addition is made by merely relying upon the report of the investigation wing and overlooking the documents available on record. 2. The ld. CIT(A) has erred in reopening the case by issuing the notice u/s 148 without any ‘’Reason to believe’’ but in fact merely on ‘’Change of Opinion’’ 2.1 At the time of hearing of the appeal, the Bench noted that there is delay of 7 days in filing the appeal by the assessee for which the assessee has filed an application and affidavit dated 11-12-2018 praying therein to condone the delay on the ground that the staff of the ld. AR has forgotten to communicate ld. AR about the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 2.2 On the other hand, the ld. DR has objected to such delay made by the assessee in late filing the appeal. 2.3 After hearing, the ld. DR and perusing the application and affidavit of the assessee, the Bench observed that the assessee is prevented by sufficient cause and in this view of the matter the delay of 7 days in filing the appeal by the assessee is condoned. 3.1 None appeared on behalf of the assessee during the course of hearing. However, an application dated 25-07-2022 has been filed by the assessee stating therein the assessee has filed a petition under “Vivad Se Vishwas Scheme-2020” to settle the matter and the said petition has been accepted by the competent authority and Form 5 has been issued on 17.11.2020 by the 3 ITA 554/JODH/2018 (RAVI KUMAR NAREDI,HUF VS ITO, WARD 3, BHILWARA competent authority. Therefore, the assessee prayed for withdrawal of the present appeal filed by him. 3.2. The ld. DR is heard who did not raise any specific objection as the declaration of the assessee to settle the dispute has been accepted by the Competent Authority. 3.3. After hearing the ld. DR and perusing the materials available on record, we permit the assessee to withdraw the appeal filed by him. Thus the appeal of the assessee is treated as withdrawn and dismissed. 4.0. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is treated as withdrawn and dismissed. Order pronounced in the open Court on 1/11/2022 . Sd/- Sd/- (B. R. BASKARAN) (SANDEEP GOSAIN) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Dated : 1/11/2022 *Mishra Copy to: 1. The Appellant 2. The Respondent 3. The CIT 4. The CIT(A) 5. The DR 6. Guard File Assistant Registrar Jodhpur Bench