9911796707
TMI Blog2023 (9) TMI 376X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... business of real estate. The Return of Income for the assessment year 2013-14 was filed on 13.05.2014 declaring a loss of Rs. 23,55,300/-. Against the said return of income, the assessment was completed by the Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle-6, Pune ('the Assessing Officer') vide order dated 28.03.2016 passed u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') at a total income of Rs. 5,60,24,230/-. While doing so, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 27,00,000/- on account of on-money consideration received from one Mr. Ajaychandran Nair. The Assessing Officer also made disallowance of interest of Rs. 1,96,84,069/- by holding that the interest cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure. The Assessing Officer also made addition o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on-money consideration of Rs. 27,00,000/-, the assessee is in appeal in ITA No. 186/PUN/2018. Being aggrieved by that part of the order of the ld. CIT(A), wherein, the ld. CIT(A) had granted relief on account of on-money consideration of Rs. 84,85,010/- and relief on account of unsecured loans of Rs. 2,72,14,448/- and relief in respect of addition of Rs. 1,96,84,069/- u/s 36(1)(iii), the Revenue is in appeal in ITA No.255/PUN/2018. 5. Now, we shall take up the assessee's appeal in ITA No.186/PUN/2018. ITA No.186/PUN/2018 - By Assessee : 6. When the matter was called on, none appeared on behalf of the assessee despite due service of notice of hearing, therefore, we proceed to dispose of the matter after hearing the ld. Sr. DR. 7. The add ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2018 - By Revenue : 13. Ground of appeal no.1 challenges the deletion of addition of Rs. 1,96,84,069/- u/s 36(1)(iii) of the Act. The ld. Sr. DR contends that the same should not be deleted by the ld. CIT(A) without meeting the case of the Assessing Officer. On mere perusal of the assessment order, the Assessing Officer disallowed the interest debited to Profit & Loss Account of Rs. 1,96,84,069/- on the ground that the same cannot be allowed as revenue expenditure and the interest needs to be capitalized to the work-in-progress, as the assessee following the percentage completion method. The interest was not disallowed doubting the genuineness of the expenditure. However, the ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition by holding that the assessee had ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hiness and genuineness of unsecured loans as well as no details of the lenders were filed before the Assessing Officer. It is only during the course of proceedings before the ld. CIT(A), the assessee company had provided the details of lenders. Based on which, the ld. CIT(A) granted relief. Thus, it is clear that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is based on the additional evidence filed before him for the first time. It is requirement of law as provided under Rule 46A of the Rules, if the additional evidence is produced for the first time before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) should give an opportunity of examining this additional evidence to the Assessing Officer, which the ld. CIT(A) had failed to do so. Accordingly, this ground of appeal nos. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
