TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (2) TMI 690
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rein the assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal: 1. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in law as well as on facts in upholding the addition of Rs.5,55,946/- made by the assessing officer disallowing the depreciation claimed on house being used as an office and as such the addition upheld is arbitrary and unjustified. 2. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals) has further erred in upholding the addition of Rs.7,66,255/- made by the Assessing Officer applying the provisions of Section 36(l)(iii) which is arbitrary and unjustified. 3. That the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has further erred in upholding the finding of the assessing officer whereby he had restri....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gs and as the assessee was having liquidity problems, the TRO attached the bank accounts and thereafter the assessee was involved in getting its bank account and property released which were attached by the Tax Department. It was submitted that only after the release of the companies bank account and property in Feb 2019, the assessee company could commence his business and matter relating to all pending tax demand and appeals were taken wherein it was noticed that the appeal for the impugned assessment year has been decided by the ld CIT(A) though a copy of the appellate order was not received. Thereafter the assessee moved an application for issuance of duplicate copy of the order which was received on 22/05/2019 and thereafter the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the assessee was involved in tax litigation for multiple years before various forums along with its related entities. It was incumbent on the assessee and the professional supporting it to take care of the tax matters for each of the years involved. It is not a case where the assessee was not adequately supported by professionals. Multiplicity of proceedings cannot be a reason sufficient enough to take appropriate steps before the appellate forums. Where the assessee was alive to its right to file an appeal against the order passed by the AO and has participated in the appellate proceedings and attended the proceedings on the scheduled date of hearings and where the matter was finally heard, it is a reasonable expectation on its part ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....der section 253(5) of the Act, we hereby condone the delay in filing the present appeal subject to cost of Rs 10,000/- as accepted by the ld AR on behalf of the assessee during the course of hearing. The same shall be deposited in PM National Relief Fund and evidence thereof should be brought on record. In light of aforesaid discussions, the delay is condoned and the appeal is hereby admitted for adjudication on merits. 5. On merits, the Ld. AR submitted that Ground No 1 relates to upholding of addition of Rs.5,55,946/- made on account of disallowance of depreciation claimed on house being used as an office. It was submitted that during the course of appellate proceedings, assessee placed on record written submissions placed in the Paper....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... thereof and in Annexure V gave the details of advances receivable in cash against projects and flats of Rs.7,94,33,467/-. The assessee company is in the business of developing real estate. The advances were given for business purposes only which was explained to the ld CIT(A). The ld CIT(A) without giving any reasoning and without reference to the Annexure V which is self-explanatory dismissed the ground. It was submitted that the business expediency has not been appreciated in the correct perspective and the contents of the written submissions at Pages 2-3 are re-iterated along with the reply dated 23/20/2012. 7. Ground No.3 relates to restricting the MAT credit to Rs.8,83,138/- as against Rs. 17,91,281/- available to the assessee. It ....