2022 (2) TMI 812

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....confirming the assessment summarily for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. The Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the appellant neither made any personal attendance nor made any submissions in support of the grounds taken in the impugned appeal. This view of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts. 3. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have seen that when the appeal was fixed for hearing, the appellant's Counsel appeared before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) and requested for time. Admittedly, the request for adjournment was not rejected. Hence the presumption to the contrary and confirmation of the order of the Assessing Officer is not justified. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....s) failed to note that the Income-tax Officer had pre-determined/pre-judged the issue, which can be established upon perusal of the show cause notice. Further, the assessment was completed in a biased manner without appreciating the facts in proper perspective. 10. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming that the appellant took loan of Rs. 97,14,221/- during the financial year 2011-12 and invested in unquoted shares of M/s. Jhaver Associates Private Limited and claimed interest expenditure in the Profit and Loss Account. This view of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is contrary to the facts. 11. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to note that the amount borrowed by the appellant wa....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....t investments are made out of share capital and share premium during the year. This view of the Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals) is arbitrary and untenable. 15. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have seen that a perusal of the funds flow statement would reveal beyond doubt that there was corresponding/adequate credit in the bank account, which can be correlated to the share application money/premium received. Hence the confirmation of the addition of Rs. 5,08,352/- is liable to be deleted. 16. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in confirming that the appellant debited the interest amount in profit and loss account out of borrowing used for the purpose of investment in shares. This view of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A) to pursue its case and justify its case. Therefore, left with no option, to proceed with appeal filed by the assessee, the learned CIT(A) dismissed appeal filed by the assessee for non-prosecution. Aggrieved by the learned CIT(A) order, the assessee is in appeal before us. 4. None appeared for the assessee. We have heard learned DR and perused materials available on record along with orders of the authorities below. The only addition made by the Assessing Officer is disallowance of expenses relatable to exempt income u/s. 14A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, by invoking Rule 8D of I.T. Rules, 1962. The Assessing Officer has not disallowed direct expenses relatable to exempt income, however, quantified interest expenses under Rule 8D(2)(ii....