DILIP GHANSHAMDAS MOHATTA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT- 21 (1), MUMBAI

O R D E R

PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM:

1. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) - 48, Mumbai (hereinafter, for the sake of brevity, referred to as 'the CIT(A)') erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the appellant on the ground that the appellant has not appeared before him without appreciating the fact A.Y.2014-15 that the appellant had already uploaded, under his digital signature, the submissions on which the appellant chose to rely, at the designated Income Tax Portal where a provision for submission to the CIT(A) has to be made.

2. Considering the, facts and circumstances of the case, the CIT(A) erred on facts and in law in dismissing the appeal of the appellant without considering the facts of the case and grounds of appeal before the CIT(A).

3. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, order of the CIT(A) dismissing the appeal be set aside and the CIT(A) be directed to rehear the appellant before deciding the appeal.

4. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the CITA) after admitting that the Statement of Facts have not been disputed by the Assessing Officer ought to have considered the statement of facts and decide the appeal in favour of the appellant.

5. Considering the facts and circumstances of the case, the CITA) ought to have deleted the addition made to the income of the appellant or alternately have reduced them substantially

6. The appellant craves leave to add and /or alter and /or amend any ground(s) of appeal.”.

3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee filed his return of income on 28.09.2014 declaring total loss to the tune of Rs(-)41,95,874/- for the A.Y. 2014-15. The return was processed u/s 143(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961. Thereafter, the return was selected for scrutiny under CASS and notice u/s 143(2) of the Act dated 31.08.2015 was issued and served upon the assessee. Thereafter, notice u/s 142(1) of the Act dated 12.04.2016 was also issued and served upon the assessee. The assessee is an individual deriving income from business and profession and house property. The assessee was the owner of three firms viz, Techolite Enterprise, Bi-oriented 2 A.Y.2014-15 plastic tubes and Pyrochem. He has submitted audited financial statements in respect of these firms. Unsecured loan and interest expense in respect of the above firms is as under.:-

S. No. Firm Unsecured Loan Interest (Rs.) Amount (Rs.) 1 Techolite Enterprises 74,10,752 8,49,178 2 Bi-oriented Plastic Tubes Nil Nil 3 Pyrochem Nil Nil The assessee has shown the unsecured loan of Rs.68,26,964/- in his personal name and has claimed interest deduction of Rs.5,52,674/- towards it as well. Nothing was found that the personal loan was used for business purpose, therefore, the interest was declined and added to the income of the assessee. The assessee debited a sum of Rs.44683/- made in respect of late penalty supply in his P & L Account. After the reply of the assessee, the same was declined and added to the income of the assessee. The total income of the assessee was assessed to the tune of Rs.(-)35,98,520/-. The assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) 48, Mumbai who dismissed the appeal of the assessee, therefore, the assessee has filed the present appeal before us.