TMI Blog2024 (4) TMI 137X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Ld. AO to follow the decision of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in Jay Metals [ 2017 (7) TMI 618 - DELHI HIGH COURT] in respect of the assessee's claim of expenses and depreciation u/s 57 - Decided in favour of assessee. Alternate remedy for challenging Scrutiny assessment - disallowance made while processing the return u/s 143(1) - HELD THAT:- As intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act goes into oblivion once this scrutiny assessment is framed. The intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act can be questioned u/s 154 of the Act by way of a rectification application. The assessee can also file an appeal against the said intimation before the First Appellate Authority. In the case under consideration, we find that though the assessee has preferred rectification application before the CPC / AO but has not received any plausible reply / order. We are of the considered view that the remedy is available elsewhere and as the assessee has triggered the available remedy it would be appropriate to consider the remedy there . The remedy sought by the assessee is not available from this forum. Decided against assessee. Non-granting of full tax credit - HELD THAT:- AO is duty bound to a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 9- 2021 in the Company's own case for AY 2011-12, 2012-13 and 2014-15, 2015-16 respectively wherein it was held that the rental income received by the Company is in the nature of composite rental income and accordingly the same to be treated as Income from other sources and not as Income from house property. 4. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO erred in not deciding the legal and factual issues arising out of the adjustments made vide intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act of Rs 12,53,64,240 and merely repeating the additions made u/s 143(1) when it's a well settled law that assessment made u/s 143(1) subsumes into assessment u/s 143(3) and the Ld. AO should assess the returned income and not income assessed under 143(1). 4.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has grossly erred in disallowing an amount of Rs. 47,01,114 u/s 40(a)(iib) without considering the fact that the same has already been disallowed by the Company in the revised and modified return of income filed leading to double disallowance of the said amount. 4.2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has grossly erred in law as well as in facts in making addition of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s Tribunal in assessee s own case since A.Y. 2011-12 to A.Y. 2016-17 and pointed out that this quarrel has been decided by this Tribunal in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The DR strongly supported the findings of the lower authorities. The DR relied upon the very same judgement which had been considered by the lower authorities. 4.3 We have carefully considered the orders of the authorities below. We find force in the contention of the Counsel that the impugned quarrel is coming from earlier assessment years wherein it has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. The latest decision of the Co-ordinate Bench is in ITA No. 602/Del/2021 for A.Y. 2016-17, the relevant findings read as under: 12. We appreciate the efforts made by the Ld. DR to convince us that the lease deed in question is not composite and that the rental receipt does not answer the description under section 56(2)(iii) of the Act. We, however, do not subscribe to the views expressed by him in his written submission which are nothing but reiteration of what the Ld. AO has said in the assessment order which has been duly considered by the Tribunal in the order (supra). The Tribunal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d. 5. Ground no. 4 and its sub-grounds relate to the addition /disallowance made by the AO which have been added /disallowed while processing the return u/s 143(1) of the Act. 5.1 The representatives of both the sides were heard at length. The case records were carefully perused and the relevant documentary evidences brought on record were duly considered in the light of Rule 18(6) of the ITAT, Rules. 5.2 At the very outset, we have to state that the intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act goes into oblivion once this scrutiny assessment is framed. The intimation passed u/s 143(1) of the Act can be questioned u/s 154 of the Act by way of a rectification application. The assessee can also file an appeal against the said intimation before the First Appellate Authority. In the case under consideration, we find that though the assessee has preferred rectification application before the CPC / AO but has not received any plausible reply / order. We are of the considered view that the remedy is available elsewhere and as the assessee has triggered the available remedy it would be appropriate to consider the remedy there. In our humble opinion, the remedy sought by the assessee is not avai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act amounting to INR 20,67,92,793. 4.2 That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO erred in completely ignoring the order passed by the Honourable Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (Hon'ble ITAT') dated 14-06-2021 and 24-09- 2021 in the Company's own case for AY 2011- 12, 2012-13 and 2014-15, 2015-16 respectively wherein it was held that the rental income received by the Company is in the nature of composite rental income and accordingly the same to be treated as Income from other sources and not as Income from house property. 5. That on the facts and in law, the Ld. AO erred in not deciding the legal and factual issues arising out of the adjustments made vide intimation u/s 143(1) of the Act and merely repeating the additions made u/s 143(1) when it's a well settled law that assessment made u/s 143(1) subsumes into assessment u/s 143(3) and the Ld. AO should assess the returned income and not income assessed under 143(1). 5.1 That on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. AO has grossly erred in law as well as in facts in making addition of Rs. 2,16,660 on account of income from Central Power Distribution of AP Ltd ('APCPDCL') offered to tax on face ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
