2023 (6) TMI 1397

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....de, DR ORDER Per PARTHA SARATHI CHAUDHURY, JM: This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of National Faceless Appeal Centre [NFAC], Delhi (for short, „CIT(A)‟), dated 10.03.2023 for A.Y.2017-18 as per the following grounds of appeal:- "1. On the facts and the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in admitting new evidences/ doc....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....39; must have been done by the assessee without there being any documentary evidence." 2. At the time of hearing, none appeared for the assessee. The case was discussed considering the materials available on record and the submissions of the ld.DR were recorded and the case was heard on merits. This appeal is time barred by 01 day. We have heard the submissions of the ld.DR and are convinced th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nd Nagar Sahakar Gruharachana Sanstha on 9.07.2016 and claimed deduction u/s.54F of Act after claiming indexed cost of improvement. iii) As per balance sheet, assessee has two residential houses other than the property sold and claimed deduction u/s.54F of the Act. The AO noted that assessee failed to file explanation to justify cost of improvement and deduction claimed u/s.54F of Act.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e and the AO had wrongly held that assessee had claimed deduction u/sec. 54F of the Act. Therefore, the adjudication conducted by the AO was on a wrong premise. Accordingly, the ld. CIT(A) in detailed order from para 7.4 onwards examined all the documents/evidences required to claim deduction u/sec. 54 of the Act and all those documents/evidences had been filed by the assessee before the AO as ....