POWERCAP CAPACITORS PRIVATE LIMITED,MUMBAI vs. DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-2(2)(1), MUMBAI, MUMBAI

On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in not adjudicating grounds of appeal on merit. 2. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming validity of assessment order passed under section 143(3) r.w.s. 144B of income tax act, 1961 without providing fair opportunity of being heard. Hence, the order passed by Ld. CIT(A) is against the principal of natural Justice and required to be quash.

3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. he facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. he facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred confirming disallowing of interest expenses of Rs CIT(A) erred confirming disallowing of interest expenses of Rs CIT(A) erred confirming disallowing of interest expenses of Rs 1637947. 1637947. 4. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 4. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to considered that disallowance made by Ld. AO CIT(A) failed to considered that disallowance made by Ld. AO CIT(A) failed to considered that disallowance made by Ld. AO is without pointing out the section under which disallowance is ithout pointing out the section under which disallowance is ithout pointing out the section under which disallowance is made is bad in law and required to be deleted. made is bad in law and required to be deleted. 5. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 5. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) failed to considered that advances were given to related CIT(A) failed to considered that advances were given to related CIT(A) failed to considered that advances were given to related party is out of own fu party is out of own funds and interest paid on borrowing is nds and interest paid on borrowing is wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business only and wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business only and wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business only and allowable in nature. allowable in nature. 6. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 6. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 3048 on account of CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 3048 on account of CIT(A) erred in confirming addition of Rs. 3048 on account of duty draw duty draw back without pointing out under which section back without pointing out under which section addition was made and even without considering the fact that addition was made and even without considering the fact that addition was made and even without considering the fact that appellant had not received such duty draw back. appellant had not received such duty draw back. 7. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. 7. On the facts and circumstances of the case and law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in confirming invocation CIT(A) erred in confirming invocation of penalty under section of penalty under section 270A of Income Tax Act, 1961. 270A of Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. At the outset, the Ld. Counsel At the outset, the Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the assessee submitted that this appeal has been filed with a delay of 82 days. The Ld. Counsel this appeal has been filed with a delay of 82 days. The Ld. Counsel this appeal has been filed with a delay of 82 days. The Ld. Counsel for the assessee filed an filed an affidavit and submitted that due to shift affidavit and submitted that due to shifting of his office, he could not attend before the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, of his office, he could not attend before the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, of his office, he could not attend before the Ld. CIT(A) and therefore, was not aware of the appellate order passed by him ,which resulted was not aware of the appellate order passed by him was not aware of the appellate order passed by him in delay in filing the appeal by 82 days. The in delay in filing the appeal by 82 days. The contents of the affidavit contents of the affidavit filed by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee filed by the Ld. Counsel of the assessee are reproduced as under: reproduced as under:

I immediately initiate the immediately initiate the process of filling appeal before Hon ble process of filling appeal before Hon ble Tribunal and the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal on Tribunal and the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal on Tribunal and the appeal was filed before the Hon'ble Tribunal on 14.07.2023. 8. NFAC decided the matter Ex 8. NFAC decided the matter Ex-party, due to mistake on my part and party, due to mistake on my part and for that I tender my sincere apology to Hon'ble Members and promise for that I tender my sincere apology to Hon'ble Members and promise for that I tender my sincere apology to Hon'ble Members and promise to me more vigilant in future. me more vigilant in future. 9. Due to such unfortunate events, there has been a delay of 82 days 9. Due to such unfortunate events, there has been a delay of 82 days 9. Due to such unfortunate events, there has been a delay of 82 days in filing Appeal. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the I submits that in filing Appeal. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the I submits that in filing Appeal. Under the aforesaid circumstances, the I submits that the delay in filling appeal was neither attributable to the PCPL nor the delay in filling appeal was neither attributable to the PCPL nor the delay in filling appeal was neither attributable to the PCPL nor intentional nor wa intentional nor warranted and if the delay is not condoned then PCPL rranted and if the delay is not condoned then PCPL will suffer irreparable loss and injury, due to mistake on my part. will suffer irreparable loss and injury, due to mistake on my part. will suffer irreparable loss and injury, due to mistake on my part. Therefore, the delay caused due to genuine and bona fide reasons, So Therefore, the delay caused due to genuine and bona fide reasons, So Therefore, the delay caused due to genuine and bona fide reasons, So I request your honour to kindly condone the delay in the interest of I request your honour to kindly condone the delay in the interest of I request your honour to kindly condone the delay in the interest of justice and equity. justice and equity.” 3. The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not seriously The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not seriously The Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) did not seriously objected for admission of the appeal. admission of the appeal.