TMI Blog2020 (9) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e said that the assessment order was barred by limitation. Accordingly, reject this additional ground taken by the assessee. Deduction u/s. 80P - AO should have considered the net income by setting off the loss incurred on account of business carried on with the regular members which resulted in loss - HELD THAT:- The assessee has raised this additional ground first time before the Tribunal and the lower authorities had no to consider this ground. In view of this, remit this issue to the file of the CIT(A) for fresh consideration. Accordingly, this additional ground of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. - I.T.A. No.372/Bang/2020 - - - Dated:- 8-9-2020 - Shri Chandra Poojari, AM For the Assessee : Shri Sandeep C, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as deduction u/s. 80P(2)(a)(i) of the Act even though the investments were made out of surplus fund and attributable to the business activity of the appellant. 6. That the learned Commissioner of Income-Tax(Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not allowing the interest income of ₹ 26,67,162/- earned from Co-operative Banks as deduction u/s. 80P(2)(d)of the Act. 7. That the learned Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) erred in law and on facts in not allowing expenditure incurred for earning the interest income from the investments. 3. The assessee has also filed additional grounds which read as follows: 1. Ground regarding Limitation 1.1 That the order u/s. 143(3) is barred by limitation as the same is issued on 01.01.2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... are part of the assessment order. The relevant facts and materials are available on record. No new or fresh material is required to decide the above grounds. During the first appeal proceedings, the appellant was advised that the same will be rectified during the appeal proceedings and no specific ground is required to be raised. However, on advice of the consultants representing the case before the Tribunal, specific grounds are being raised. Hence, it was prayed to admit the additional grounds and decide them on merits. The appellant relied on the following decisions of the Supreme Court: a. CIT vs. NTPVC (229 ITR 383) b. Jute Corporation of India vs. CIT(187 ITR 688) 4. The assessee has raised the additional grounds due to in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case of CIT vs. BJN Hotels Limited (382 ITR 110). 8. On the other hand, the Ld. DR submitted that 30/12/2017 and 31/12/2017 were Saturday and Sunday. Being so, it cannot be considered as working days and it was rightly posted to the assessee on 01/01/2018. 9. I have heard the rival submissions and perused the record. Admittedly, in this case, the assessment order was passed on 29/12/2017. However, it was received by the assessee through Speed Post on 02/01/2018. Now the contention of the assessee is that it should have been posted on or before 31/12/2017. However, I find that 30/12/2017 and 31/12/2017 were Saturday and Sunday being Government holidays. Being so, the assessment order was rightly sent by Speed Post on 01/01/2018 and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
