TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 1053
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....4 of the Act passed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle 6(3)(1), Mumbai [ld AO] holding that appeal is delayed and no condonation application is filed. 02. Assessee has raised following grounds of appeal:- "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) has erred in passing order u/s 250 of the Act, merely on the ground that the matter is time barred as there is delay in filing appeal u/s 246A of the Act and thereby dismissing the grounds raised by the appellant against the order u/s 154 of the Act without considering the fact that the order was served on 28.02.2019 and the appellant had filed the appeal within thirty days i.e. on 28.03.2019 as duly prescribed and covered under S....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO failed to allow credit of TDS of Rs.10,22,766 despite the same being claimed in the return of income of the appellant. The appellant prays that such short credit shall be granted to the appellant." 03. The fact of the case shows that the assessee is a Private Limited Company engaged in development of commercial, retail and entertainment complex. It is also engaged in business of rental of space and providing various services in the commercial complex. It filed its return of income on 29 September 2014 at a loss of Rs.15,87,48,854/-, which was revised on 25 March 2016. The case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny and assessment under Section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act)....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ity is carried out in an organized manner who earned profit by the commercial venture. Accordingly, he taxed the entire rental income as business income. He also did not grant deduction of expenditure, which was disallowed by the assessee against the income from house property. 07. Further, on 15 December 2017, the learned Assessing Officer also issued notice under Section 154 of the Act proposing disallowance of interest expenditure and property tax. The assessee objected to it on several counts. The learned Assessing Officer after perusal of the submission passed rectification order disallowing standard deduction at the rate of 30% amounting to Rs.22,08,33,914/- and pre construction interest cost of Rs.14,50,41,337/-. The ld AO passed or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t was available on the ITBA. The tax and computation sheet showed that there is an order under Section 154 of the Act according to which the demand has arisen. The assessee therefore, on 28th February, 2019 wrote a letter to the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, 6(3)(1), Mumbai, submitting that there is a online demand outstanding is shown by way of income tax and computation sheet on account of action under Section 154 of the Act. However, no order under Section 154 of the Act is available with the assessee and therefore, assessee requested the learned Assessing Officer to provide a copy of the said order consequent to which the aforesaid demand has arisen. On 28 February 2019, assessee was provided with a copy of the order dated 9 February ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eceipt of order. Therefore, appeal as claimed by the assessee is filed in time and therefore, learned CIT (A) should have perused the various columns filed in form no. 35, which is stated to be true to the best of the information of the director of the company. 012. The LD CIT [A] looked at the date of order i.e. 9/02/2018 , noted that appeal is filed on 28/03/2019 , in column where it is mentioned that there is no delay in filing appeal, held that appeal is delayed by 384 days , no condonation request is filed, hence, dismissed appeal. 013. The learned CIT (A) should have at least given an opportunity to the assessee of clarifying the above facts stated when mobile number and email address of the assessee are provided at column no. 17 of....