9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (10) TMI 1251X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ess of the order dated 19.05.2015 of CIT(A)-20, New Delhi pertaining to 2011-12 assessment year. Although various grounds have been raised by the assessee in the present appeal. However, at the time of hearing, both the parties addressed only Ground No. 2 which reads as under:- 2. "In ignoring the fact that the Assessing Officer had wrongly added Rs. 1,00,835/- to the returned income of the asse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... articulars of the deduction made by M/s Sindh Projects Masonry amounting to Rs. 1,00,835/- the assessee filed revised computation of income in the course of the assessment proceedings. However, the Assessing Officer being of the view that it was not reflected in the books of accounts of the assessee added the same to the income of the assessee. 3. In appeal before the First Appellate Authority, t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n filed before the AO. Attention was invited to the fact that the return was filed on 30.09.2011. In the circumstances and in the face of the Remand Report where all these facts have been examined, addition on this account was not warranted on facts. Referring to the order of the CIT(A), it was his submission that the Ld. CIT(A) misdirected herself while trying to do a reconciliation of the 26AS w ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... As per the record, assessee claims relief on the basis of aforesaid Form 16A stated to be made available to the assessee only on or after 12.10.2012 thus in the original computation these could not be reflected. Since the aspect has not been addressed and examined the impugned order is set aside and the ld.CIT(A) is directed to consider the claim of the assessee addressing the specific document an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
