TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (10) TMI 372
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....2015-16 to 2018-19. The impugned orders were originated from the order of the ld. Joint Commissioner of Income Tax (OSD), Central Circle-1, Jalandhar, (in brevity the AO) the order passed u/s. 153C read with section 144 of the Act, date of order 12.02.2021. As these are assessee's own appeals involving common issues, they are being disposed of by this composite order. Facts, for convenience, are being taken ITA No. 121/Asr/2022, for A.Y. 2018-19 as lead case. 2. The following grounds have been raised therein: "1) That the Ld. CIT(A) has wrongly allowed only 50% of claim of interest on housing loan = Rs. 117,327 x 50% =58,664 u/s. 24(b), instead of 100% by holding that appellant's wife is joint-holder in loan but further ignored t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompleted u/s. 144. The assessee challenged the orders of the ld. AO before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee applied under rule 46A of the Income Tax Rule, 1962 for admission of additional evidence during the appeal hearing. The for claim u/s. 24 and for deduction section 80C which was not taken in the return which was prayed to consider during the appeal hearing. Only the deduction for HBL interest u/s. 24 was allowed @50% of in the hands of the assessee. The other issues are remained untouched & upheld order of the ld. AO partly. 3. Aggrieved assessee filed appeal before us for judicious consideration. 4. During hearing before the ITAT, two basic points are agitated by the ld. Counsel, before the ITAT. The assessee claimed u/s. 80C amount of....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ectfully relied on Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 3231 (SC). 6. The ld. Counsel for the assessee Mr. Tarun Bansal, argued and submitted that the deductions are claimed during the appeal hearing and ld. CIT(A). For, clear understanding the submission of the assessee before the ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as below. The said appeal order page no. 2 para 3 is extracted as below:- "3. During the course of appellate proceedings, the AR of the appellant submitted arguments as under: "Sub: Written submission in the case of Sh. Ajay Sharma, Guru Sangam, Punjabi Bagh, Kapurthala -144601, Punjab. A.Y. 2018-19, PAN AOOPS3250C Your Honour it is respectfully submitted as under: 1. That assessment in the case was framed on 12.02.2021 at i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... 6.1. As per the ld. Counsel, the assessee is eligible for the claim of deduction during the time of appeal proceeding. The ld. Counsel respectfully relied on the judgment of High Court of Delhi, in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi-II v. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. [2008] 172 TAXMAN 258/306 ITR 42 (DELHI); "16. In the case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT [1991] 187 ITR 6882 while dealing with the powers of the Appellate Assistant Commissioner, the Supreme Court observed that:- '...An appellate authority has all the powers which the original authority may have in deciding the question before it subject to the restrictions or limitations, if any, prescribed by the statutory provisions. In the absence of any statu....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mpinge on the power of Tribunal." 6.2. Mr. Bansal further relied respectfully in the case of Taylor Instrument Co. (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax, [1992] 64 Taxman 129 (Delhi); "23. The Supreme Court in Jute Corporation of India's case (supra), specifically approved the decision of the Calcutta High Court in Rai Kumar Srimal v. CIT [1976] 102 ITR 525, wherein it had been held that the AAC was entitled to admit new ground or evidence either suo motu or at the invitation of the parties." 6.3. The ld. Counsel respectfully relied on High Court of Bombay in the case of Sesa Goa Ltd. v. Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Panaji, Goa, [2020] 117 taxmann.com 548 (Bombay); "15. The circumstance that we have observed that th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....read with section 22 of the Act. The wife of the assessee is not an owner but a co-borrower. She is not eligible for claim of interest as per the Act. We direct the revenue to allow the balance deduction U/s 24, interest on HBL to assessee. 7.1. We respectfully consider the order of Goetz India Ltd., supra. The catena of judgments is produced by the ld. Council before the Bench. The orders of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court & Hon'ble High Court of Bombay respectfully observed the order of Hon'ble Apex Court. Here, two issues are formulated, weather the unclaimed deduction can be claim before the assessing authority without filing the revised return and weather the power of the appellate authority can allow the claim of duction whi....