TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2024 (11) TMI 862
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....PER BENCH This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the ld. Principal Commissioner of Income Tax - 1, Kochi dated 30.03.2022 for Assessment Year (AY) 2017-18. 2. The only issue raised by the assessee is that the ld. PCIT erred in holding that the assessment framed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of Reven....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....condoning the same. 4. We have heard the rival contentions of both the parties and perused the materials available on record. Considering the fact that the delay in filing the appeal by the assessee was attributable to the Auditor, which is supported by the affidavit of the Auditor. Accordingly, we hold that there was sufficient cause which prevented the assessee from filing the appeal within the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessment was framed by the AO after necessary verification and examination of facts on record. Therefore, the same cannot be held as erroneous in so far prejudicial to the interest of Revenue on account of non-verification. The learned A.R. further contended that once the expenses in dispute have been capitalized and no deduction of whatsoever has been claimed by the assessee, even if the order....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rned PCIT has observed that the expenses in dispute have already been capitalized by the assessee in the books of account. Since this fact has already been observed by the learned PCIT in his order, there remains no ambiguity that the assessee has not claimed the benefit of deduction of the impugned expenses in its P&L Account. Thus, we hold that once no deduction has been claimed by the assessee ....