TMI Blog2019 (2) TMI 785X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the head "Income from house property". Apart from above assessee has interest income of ₹ 3,87,540/-. Expenses in respect of house property have already been allowed as standard deduction u/s. 24(a) of the Act. The assessee has claimed expenditure in respect of remuneration to Director. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) rejected the claim of assessee on the ground that since there ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 017 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The first notice of appeal was sent to the assessee through RPAD on 29-10-2018 for 29-11-2018. The notice of appeal was duly served as is evident from the acknowledgment available on record. However, none appeared on behalf of the assessee on the date fixed i.e. 29-11-2018. Fresh notice of hearing of the appeal was issued for 10-01-2019. The second notice ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... have erred in not allowing the set off of carried forward business loss and current business loss against the income from other sources of ₹ 3,87,540/-. It is your appellant claim that he is entitled for the same as per the provisions of section 72 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 4. Shri Rajesh Gawali representing the Department vehemently supported the order of Commissioner of Income Tax ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e in respect of remuneration to Director. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) rejected the claim of assessee on the ground that since there is no business of the assessee, there is no question of business loss. The provisions of section 72 allow set off of business loss/carried forward business loss against income under any head (except under the head Salaries‟). But to claim loss, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
