SUKHPAL SINGH AHLUWALIA,MUMBAI vs. ITO(IT)WARD1(1)(1), MUMBAI

The assessee has challenged the order of DRP dated 15.06.2022, where the DRP has not considered the submission made by the assessee and by treating the rectified Form 35A as not filed within the prescribed time limit. The assessee has also challenged

(A.Y. 2019-20) Sukhpal Singh Ahluwalia vs. ITO the other grounds where additions have been made by the A.O. in computing the long term capital gain (LTCG for short).

The brief facts are that the assessee filed his return of income declaring total income of Rs.13,94,170/-. The assessee’s case was selected for scrutiny and the draft order dated 29.09.2021 was passed u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 144C(1) of the Act, proposing the assessment of total income at Rs.7,41,60,665/- by the A.O. The assessee filed objection against the draft order before the DRP(2), Mumbai on 28.10.2021. The ld. DRP dismissed the objection raised by the assessee on the ground that Form No. 35A filed by the assessee was signed by Shri Rashmikant C. Modi, Chartered Accountant who then stated that they were not agent of the assessee within the meaning of provision of section 163(1) of the Act.

By considering the above submission, the ld. DRP held that as Form No. 35A ought to be filed by the assessee himself or through his agent as per Rule 4, clause (i) of the DRP Rules and since Form 35A was signed by Shri R. C. Modi, who in their respective letter claimed to be not an agent of the assessee. The ld. DRP failed to consider the rectified Form No.35A and considered to be not filed within the time limit and thereby the objection raised by the assessee was rejected.

Aggrieved by the said order, the assessee was in appeal before us.

Having heard both the rival submissions and perused the materials on record, we are inclined to remand the said matter to the ld. DRP for adjudication on merits by duly considering the rectified Form No. 35A.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purpose.