TMI Blog2023 (2) TMI 409X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... MI 769 - ITAT BANGALORE ] wherein held held by the CIT(A), as issue is not emanating from the order passed u/s 154 of the Act. The assessee cannot use proceedings u/s 154 to file appeal against the order passed u/s 143(1) of the Act. In the present case also, the assessee filed appeal against the order passed by AO u/s 143(3) of the Act dated 14.12.2016. There was no appeal by assessee against the rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Act dated 11.10.2017. Even if the assessee raised the ground in his appeal with regard to addition/deletion made in rectification order passed u/s 154 of the Act before the ld. CIT(A), the ld. CIT(A) must have called for the remand report from the AO, which he failed to do so. Being so, in the interest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... renting of house properties. Returned income for assessment year 2014-15 was Rs. 8,46,510/- which comprised of income from house property, capital gains and other sources. Income-tax assessment of the assessee for assessment year 2014-15 was completed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short] vide order dated 14th December 2016 by the Income-tax Officer Ward 1(2)(3), Bangalore (AO). In the return filed, the assessee had claimed exemption under section 54 of the Act to the extent of Rs.1,15,43,000/-. In the assessment, the learned AO disallowed the exemption under section 54 to the extent of Rs. 35,45,943/- resulting in an additional tax payable of Rs. 8,24,700/-. Against the assessment order, the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ify the assessment order passed under section 143(3). The appellant has constructed buildings on the four sites for which proof of construction shall be furnished at the time of appeal hearings. 2. Appellant prays that: (a) Rectification order of the learned ITO with Income-tax demand of Rs. 38,16,710 be set-aside and the deduction claimed under section 54 of Rs. 82,85,000 be allowed; (b) The appeal filed earlier against the order under section 143(3) be examined on merits. The appellant further craves leave and reserves its right to vary, amend, alter and/or add to the grounds of appeal and to produce such oral and documentary evidence and file such compilation of documents as may be necessary at the time of hearing of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sue. The same cannot be said as a mistake apparent from the record and therefore the rectification order passed u/s. 154 of the Act by the AO as contested in Ground No. 1.3 in the detailed ground furnished by the appellant was bad-in Law and illegal. Therefore, such Rectification Order passed by the AO revoking the deduction already granted u/s. 54 of the Act in respect of three adjacent plots in which investment was made by the appellant is held as invalid and void. In other words, the investment made in three plots for acquiring a new , asset out of sale proceeds of an old asset / property since used for construction 1 of residential house subsequently within 3 years as provided u/s. 54 of the Act, the same is eligible for deduction while ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... te order. Therefore, I am of the considered opinion that the appellant was not eligible for deduction u/s. 54 / 54F of the Act in respect of 4th plot acquired by utilizing Rs. 30,00,000/- on 28/11/2015. No such decision has also been cited by the appellant against the above mentioned findings of the undersigned. Accordingly, the denial of deduction u/s. 54 / 54F of the Act in respect of the 4th Plot acquired by the Ld. Assessing Officer is hereby confirmed. 6.3 Ground Nos.1 and 2 raised in the From No.35 and the elaborate grounds further raised in Ground No.1 to 8 are accordingly partly allowed. 3.2. Now the contention of the ld. D.R. is that the assessee was in appeal before ld. CIT(A) with regard to assessment order passed u/s 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee has not filed Form 10 manually within the stipulated time i.e., before the due date for filing return of income and therefore the assessee cannot avail the benefit of CBDT Circular to cover its own mistake. The appeal of the assessee is not against the order of AO passed u/s. 143(1), on the other hand it is against the proceedings u/s. 154 of the Act. Being so, these two orders stand on a different footing. In other words, what could not be done by the assessee directly, cannot be achieved indirectly. The assessee in this case has filed appeal against the order u/s. 154 to challenge the intimation order u/s. 143(1), though there was no appeal against the order u/s 143(1) passed by the CPC. Being so, we are not in agreement with the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
