TMI Blog2022 (4) TMI 681X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he file of the CIT (A) to decide it afresh by providing adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. We don t have any hesitation to condone the delay of 4 years for filing the application under section 154 of the IT Act due to reasonable cause and genuine in nature and we consider accordingly, it is a fit case for remand for proper adjudication of the case by following the established procedure laid down. under rules 46A(1), (2) and (3) of the Rules which we order accordingly. The impugned order passed by the Lower authority is hereby quashed and set aside. The appeal is remanded to the Commissioner of Income-tax. - ITA. No. 185/JP/2021 - - - Dated:- 12-4-2022 - Dr. S. Seethalakshmi, JM And Shri Rathod Kamlesh Jayantbhai, AM F ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TR and not filed the Audit Report alongwith ITR. Therefore the contention of the assessee is not acceptable. Further the assessee filed application after four year date of processing and the last 154 order. Hence application u/s 154 filed by the assessee is hereby rejected. 4. Being aggrieved by the impugned order issued U/s 154 of the IT Act, the assessee preferred an appeal before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) finally held that as under:- 4. I have considered the facts of the case and written submissions of the appellant. The assessee filed return of income declaring loss of ₹ 32,549/-. The return was processed by CPC and tax liability was raised U/s 115JB of the Act. The appellant filed rectification application u/s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This appeal has been filed against order U/S 154 of I.T. Act, 1961 dated 13/03/2019 passed by C.I.T. (Appeals) National faceless Appeals, determining total income of ₹ 722991/- the brief facts are as under: That appellant is engaged agriculture producing and same was sold during the year under consideration but Id. A.O. has not treated it as agriculture income. Ground No.1 That assesse has filed return of income online declaring total Loss of ₹ 32549/- CPC has not consider agriculture income, because assessee company is having only agriculture income, but figures of agriculture income was not shown/ entered under exempted income due to omission, therefore at the time of assessment CPC impose MAT tax liabili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... O. is wrong in this regard. Assessee was carrying on agricultural operation in the agricultural land owned by company at gidhani dudu, Jaipur and derived income from sale of agriculture produce. Assessee would like to submit that the Assessing officer has erroneously treated the agriculture income as business income. Actually, income from an agriculture income and the same is exempted under section 10(1) of the Income Tax Act and having complete income from agriculture which is exempt income and assesse is having no any other income and return was filed accordingly. 6. At the time of arguments, the ld. AR of the assessee has filed a detailed written submissions praying therein to delete the addition of ₹ 7,22,991/- as confir ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... able cause and genuine in nature and we consider accordingly, it is a fit case for remand for proper adjudication of the case by following the established procedure laid down. under rules 46A(1), (2) and (3) of the Rules which we order accordingly. The impugned order passed by the Lower authority is hereby quashed and set aside. The appeal is remanded to the Commissioner of Income-tax ,who shall make an endeavour to dispose of the entire appeal in accordance with law as indicated above as expeditiously as possible, The assessee is also directed to produce relevant additional evidences concerning the issue in question, where additional evidence in form of segmental audited results have been admitted which needs to be verified and examined by ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
