9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (9) TMI 1030 - AT - Income TaxRectification of mistake u/s 154 - CIT(A) has passed a combined order for AY 2013-14 and 2014-15 but has only dealt with AY 2013-14 and has failed to mention/adjudicate issues raised in AY 2014-15 - addition made on account of deemed rental income in respect of the vacant flat - HELD THAT - As it is evident that Ld.CIT(A) has failed to adjudicate issues raised for AY 2014-15. Hence, in the interest of justice, we remit the issue to the file of Ld.CIT(A) to pass a speaking order on the issues related to this appeal, which were raised before him but have not been adjudicated by him. Needless to add, assessee should be granted adequate opportunity of being heard. Appeal by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues:
1. Failure to adjudicate on grounds related to deemed rental income addition. 2. Charging of interest under section 234A of the Act. 3. Short credit for TDS granted by the ACIT. Issue 1: The appeal was against the order of the CIT(A) dated 17.09.2018 for Assessment Year 2014-15, specifically challenging the failure to adjudicate on the addition of deemed rental income of ?3,36,000 for a vacant flat. The appellant argued that since the issue was common for assessment years 2013-14 and 2014-15, the CIT(A) only addressed the former, following an ITAT decision in the appellant's favor for the assessment year 2012-13. The appellant sought deletion of the addition based on the previous ITAT decision. The tribunal noted the omission by the CIT(A) to address the issues for 2014-15 and remitted the matter back to the CIT(A) for a detailed order, emphasizing the appellant's right to be heard. Issue 2: The second ground of appeal related to the charging of interest of ?1,22,146 under section 234A of the Act. The appellant contended that since the return of income was filed within the due date, the ACIT should not have imposed interest. The appellant had applied for rectification under section 154, and if rectified before the appeal hearing, requested to withdraw the ground. The tribunal did not delve into the merits but highlighted the appellant's actions regarding rectification. Issue 3: Regarding the third ground of appeal, the dispute centered on the short credit for TDS amounting to ?11,23,599. The ACIT had granted credit for TDS totaling ?5,18,51,414, falling short of the appellant's claim of ?5,29,75,013. The appellant argued for full credit as claimed in the return of income, seeking the balance credit of ?11,23,599. Similar to the second issue, the appellant had applied for rectification under section 154, with the intention to withdraw the ground if rectified before the appeal hearing. The tribunal did not provide a substantive ruling on the matter but acknowledged the rectification application made by the appellant. In conclusion, the tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, emphasizing that they did not adjudicate on the merits of the issues presented. The decision was made on 21.09.2021, granting the appellant the opportunity for a fair hearing on the unresolved issues related to the appeal.
|
