IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL “A” BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER &

SHRI MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA No. 4146/Mum/2025 (Assessment Year: 2017-18)

(Assessment Year: 2017-18)

(Assessment Year: 2017-18)

(Assessment Year: 2017-18)

(Assessment Year: 2017-18)

(Assessment Year: 2017-18)

(Assessment Year: 2017-18)

(Assessment Year: 2017-18)

Assessee by Shri Kapil Hirani, Ld. AR Revenue by Shri Rajesh Kumar Yadav, Ld. DR Date of Hearing 13.01.2026 Date of Pronouncement 19.01.2026 आदेश / ORDER PER MAKARAND VASANT MAHADEOKAR, AM:

This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order dated

17.10.2024 passed by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre (NFAC), Delhi [hereinafter referred to as “CIT(A)”] for Assessment Year 2017–18, whereby the CIT(A) dismissed the assessee’s appeal and confirmed the addition made by the Assessing Officer under section 69C of the Income-tax Act, 1961[hereinafter referred to as “the Act”] as per his order dated 29.03.2022 passed under section 147 read with section 144B of the Act.

Condonation of Delay

2. At the outset, we note that there is a delay of 169 days in filing the present appeal before the Tribunal, as pointed out by the Registry. The assessee has filed an affidavit for condonation of delay, duly sworn by the Director of the assessee company, explaining the reasons for the said delay. On perusal of the affidavit, it is stated that the delay occurred on account of the assessee seeking appropriate legal advice and, more importantly, due to the serious ill health of the son of the Director, who was undergoing continuous medical treatment and therapy sessions from 07.02.2025 onwards, which substantially impeded the assessee’s ability to file the appeal within the prescribed period. It is further affirmed that the delay was neither wilful nor deliberate, that the assessee has not derived any benefit from the delayed filing, and that grave prejudice would be caused if the delay is not condoned.

3. Having considered the explanation furnished in the affidavit and keeping in view the settled legal position that substantial justice should prevail over technical considerations, we are satisfied that the assessee has demonstrated reasonable cause for the delay in filing the appeal. The explanation appears to be bona fide and supported by sworn averments, and there is no material on record to suggest any mala fide intent or negligence. The learned Departmental Representative (DR) raised no objection in condoning the delay. Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the delay of 169 days in filing the appeal is condoned, and the appeal is admitted for adjudication on merits.

Facts of the Case

4. The assessee is a company incorporated under the Companies Act and is engaged in the business of trading in textile goods. The assessee filed its return of income for A.Y. 2017–18 on 14.02.2018, declaring a total income of Rs. 98,130/-. The return was initially processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Subsequently, based on information received by the Assessing Officer that the assessee had entered into transactions involving purchases from M/s Indo Count Industries Limited without taking actual delivery of goods, the Assessing Officer formed a belief that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment. After obtaining the necessary approval from the competent authority, reassessment proceedings were initiated by issuance of notice under section 148 of the Act dated 31.03.2021.In response to the notice under section 148, the assessee filed its return of income. Thereafter, notices under sections 143(2) and 142(1) were issued and served upon the assessee, calling for details and explanations.

5. During the course of reassessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer sought information from the Jurisdictional Assessing Officer, who, in turn, furnished a copy of the statement of Shri Tilok Chand Kothari, Director of the assessee company, recorded under secti