M/S. COMFORTABLE ABODE PRIVATE LIMITED,BENGALURU vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(1), BENGALURU

PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

. No request of 3 11.01.2023 17.01.2023 adjournment made. 4 18.01.2023 25.01.2023 In view of this non-compliance from the assessee’s side, the NFAC confirmed the order of AO. Against this assessee is in appeal before us by way of following grounds: 1) The orders of the authorities below in so far as they are against the appellant are opposed to law, equity, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances of the case. 2) The learned CIT[A] is not justified in disposing off the appeal ex- parte without allowing sufficient and real opportunity to the appellant to represent the case and hence. the impugned order passed requires to be cancelled. 3) Without prejudice to the above, the learned CIT [A] is not justified in sustaining the addition in respect of notional interest on property advance to the extent of Rs. Rs.89,70,956/- under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant's case. 4) Without prejudice to the above, and assuming that the impugned disallowance was made in terms of section 36[1][iii] of the Act, the learned CIT[A] ought to have held that the interest paid on M/s. Comfortable Abode Private Limited, Bangalore Page 3 of 4. ICD also had to be regarded as part of the closing work-in- progress of the project and accordingly inventorised under the facts and in the circumstances of the appellant’s case.