TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (8) TMI 716
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is delayed by 1862 days. In the affidavit sworn by the Director of the assessee company, it has been submitted that the impugned order was issued online and the assessee received no communication regarding the same. Further, the assessee also did not receive the physical copy of the impugned order. It is further submitted that it is on the appointment of another Chartered Accountant, the assessee was advised that the impugned order is available on the Income Tax portal. Pursuant thereto, the assessee immediately filed the appeal on 10/08/2022 against the impugned order and thus the aforesaid circumstances resulted in the delay in filing the present appeal. The assessee further submitted that 1862 days includes 807 days of Covid period, whi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the date of receipt of the order, which in the present case is claimed to be 14/06/2022. The Revenue has not brought any evidence on record to rebut the aforesaid claim. We find that the reasons stated by the assessee for seeking condonation of delay fall within the parameters for grant of condonation laid down by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Collector Land Acquisition, Anantnag Vs. MST Katiji and others: 1987 SCR (2) 387. It is well established that rules of procedure are handmaid of justice. When substantial justice and technical considerations are pitted against each other, the cause of substantial justice deserves to be preferred. In the present case, the assessee did not stand to benefit by the late filing of the appeal. In....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sessee was selected for scrutiny and statutory notices under section 143(2) as well as section 142(1) of the Act alongwith a questionnaire was issued and served on the assessee. During the assessment proceedings, on perusal of the details of interest expenses furnished by the assessee, it was observed that the assessee has claimed interest on vehicle loans/other loans of Rs. 40,42,961 as interest expenses. It was further observed that the aforesaid interest has been paid to Tata Capital, Kotak Mahindra P. Ltd., Reliance Capital Ltd., and Shagun Corporation without deduction of tax at source. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer vide order dated 31/03/2015 passed under section 143(3) of the Act disallowed the interest on vehicle loans/other lo....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Now, in the present appeal, the assessee by way of additional evidence has produced a copy of Form No. 26A issued by the Chartered Accountant under the first proviso to sub-section (1) of section 201 of the Act in respect of interest paid by the assessee to Reliance Capital Ltd., wherein it has been certified that Reliance Capital Ltd. has taken into account the sum received as interest from the assessee while computing its taxable income in the return of income filed. In view of the above, we deem it appropriate to admit the additional evidence filed by the assessee before us. We are further of the view that in the interest of justice, this issue be remanded to the Assessing Officer for de novo adjudication as per law after necessary veri....