KISAN VASANT PAWAR,PUNE vs. INCOME-TAX OFFICER, WARD - 14(4), PUNE

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law the Learned CIT(A) has erred in not condoning the delay of 90 days inspite of the fact that your appellant was unfit due to medical condition and his counsel was occupied in certain other legal compliance which has resulted into filing the appeal. In view of this, matter may kindly be restored back to the file of CIT(A) for the matter to be decided on merit by condoning the delay in the interest of principal of natural justice, Without prejudice to above ground following ground is taken on merit; 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Assessing Officer has erred in applying the provisions of section 44AD of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by disregarding the fact that the assessee is the consulting engineer therefore his case is covered u/s 44AA to which section 44AD do not apply therefore action of estimation of income by applying the provisions of section 44AD is bad in law and further action of disallowing expenses of Rs.26,59,322/- claims against professional income and impugned addition of Rs.10.58,674/- is bad in law and deserves to be struck down.