TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (11) TMI 361
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hat too without any basis, material or evidences. 2. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in rejecting the application filed by assessee and further erred in not allowing the brought forward of losses and depreciation and that too by recording incorrect facts and findings and without appreciating the submissions of assessee. 3. That having regard to the facts and circumstances of the case, Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in confirming the action of Ld. AO in rejecting the application filed by assessee and further erred in not allowing the brought forward of losses and depreciation and framing the impugned assessment order which....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....come of Rs. 96,540/- and it was processed by CPC, Banglore on an income of Rs. 1,21,240/-. It was submitted by the Ld.AR that this is a wrong assertion of facts. Against this order dated 12.10.2010, it was his submission the assessee came in appeal and the submissions of the assessee have been noted at pages 3 & 4 by the CIT(A) wherein in his finding, he comes to a conclusion that the assessee had e-filed its return declaring NIL income. It was submitted that he has also held that as per intimation u/s 143(1) dated 26.01.2011, the assessee had claimed a loss of Rs. 96,543/- but in the processing u/s 143(1) no such adjustment has been allowed. In view of the same, the appeal was dismissed holding as under:- 5. "Facts of the case and rival c....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....facts, it was submitted that the intimation u/s 143(1) is dated 26.01.2011 and notice u/s 143(2) was issued on 26.09.2011. It was her submission that if there was a mistake u/s 143(1), it should have been addressed at that stage. In the facts of the present case it was her submission that the genuineness of the claim has not been examined or considered by anyone infact for very valid and cogent reason. The assessment order it was submitted has been passed in 143(3) proceedings after hearing the assessee and considering the material on record including the TDS refund etc. Accordingly, the AO on facts was justified in rejecting the petition u/s 154 vide his order dated 12.10.2012 holding as under:- "Application u/s 154 of the I.T Act, 1961 f....