TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (9) TMI 449
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ollowing grounds of appeal have been raised by the appellant: 1. "On facts and circumstances of the case, the order passed u/s 154 of the Act by the Ld. CPC is void ab initio; invalid, bad in law and grossly in violation of principles of natural justice. 2. The Ld. CIT (A) has erred in not condoning the delay in filing the appeal without appreciating the genuine reasons for delay in filing the appeal and not giving due consideration to the peculiar facts and circumstances of the case. 3. The Ld. CIT (A) erred in facts and law in not appreciating the fact that the rental income earned of Rs. 52,69,228/-is taxed twice e. once under the head "Income from Business and Profession" and another under the head "Income from House Property ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....under the head 'income from house property'. In view of the adjustments made by the CPC, rental income of Rs. 52,69,230/- was taxed twice: (i) one under Income from House Property, (ii) and another under Income from other Sources. This is a clear mistake apparent from record which ought to have been rectified u/s. 154 of the Act. 5. While considering the appeal of the assessee, the Ld. CIT (A) issued following e- notices/ letters to the assessee. 1) Deficiency letter dated 06/01/2024 2) Hearing letter dated 14/02/2024 3) Hearing letter dated 21/02/2024 4) Hearing letter dated 25/03/2024 6. In response to the above notices, the appellant filed written submissions on various dates i.e.09/02/2024, 14/02/2024, 22/02/2024, 25/02/2024 a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....(A) as the same gets covered by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 23rd March 2020 in writ petition (civil) No. 03 of 2020 and even CBDT has issued Circular No. 8/2021 on 30th April 2021 providing various relaxations till 31st May 2021 including extended time for filing the appeals before CIT(Appeals). 5. However, with regards to balance 704 days we wish to state that assessee was neither knowing the fact that rectification order has been passed by the Id. Assessing Officer nor the appellant was intimated by the auditors appointed by the assessee company regarding such order. When the assessee got the knowledge of the same the assessee was advised by his auditor that issue would get resolved by filing grievances. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... to have vested right in injustice being done because of a non-deliberate delay. 8. In support we wish to place reliance on the decision in case of Smt. Rupa Maheshbhai Gandhi vs. ITO, Ward-3(2)(10) Ahmedabad (ITA No.2224/Ahd/2018) "7. In the light of the above, if I consider explanation of the assessee before the Id. CIT(A), then it would reveal that the assessee was not aware about the assessment order or about the proceedings at the level of the assessment officer. Immediately, when she came into the knowledge about the order, she e-filed the appeal, and in the process delay of 66 days was occurred. To my mind, looking to the quantum of delay of 66 days, and also of the fact that on similar set of facts, in the case of relative of th....