ECONOMIC LAWS PRACTICE ,MUMBAI vs. DY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-16(2), MUMBAI

1. The Order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case and therefore, the Order passed by the Ld. CIT (A) is bad in law and liable to be set aside.

(A.Y.2021-22) Economic Laws Practice

2. On facts and in circumstances of the case, the additions/ disallowances/ adjustments made by the Assistant Director of Income Tax, CPC Bengaluru ("AO") and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A) are contrary to the statutory provisions under the IT Act, devoid of merits and liable to be deleted. Violation of Principle of Natural Justice 3. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in passing the Order without providing adequate opportunity of being heard to the Assessee. 4. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in dismissing the appeal in limini without deciding the issues raised in the appeal on merits. Disallowance of interest paid on delayed payment of Tax Deducted at Source ("TDS") amounting to INR 3, 07,770/- 5. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the disallowance of INR 3,07,770/- made by the AO in respect of interest paid on delayed payment of TDS merely on the basis of reporting under Clause 34(c) of the tax audit report. 6. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in disregarding the law laid down by the jurisdictional High Court by confirming the disallowance of interest paid on delayed payment of TDS by the learned AO without evaluating the allowability of the expense. Short grant of TDS credit by INR 59, 30,008/- 7. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in upholding the action of the AO in granting of TDS credit of INR 4,95,41,945/- only as compared to TDS credit of INR 5,54,71,953/- claimed by the Assessee in the return of income thereby resulting in short

(A.Y.2021-22) Economic Laws Practice

(A.Y.2021-22) Economic Laws Practice

4. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in dismissing the appeal in limini without deciding the issues raised in the appeal on merits. Short grant of TDS credit by INR 10, 85,014/- 5. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in upholding the action of the AO in granting of TDS credit of INR 9, 26, 36,775/- only as compared to TDS credit of INR 9, 37, 21,789/- claimed by the Assessee in the return of income thereby resulting in short grant of TDS credit by INR 10, 85,014/-. 6. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) failed to appreciate the fact that the Assessee has rightly claimed TDS credit of INR 9,37,21,789/- which is corresponding to the income offered by the Assessee in the return of income. Levy of interest under Section 2348 and 234C of the IT Act 7. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT (A) has grossly erred in confirming the levy of interest under Section 234B and Section 234C of the IT Act. 8. On facts and in circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has grossly erred in confirming the action of the AO in not considering the credit under Section 90 and Section 91 of the IT Act while computing interest under 2348 and 234C of the IT Act. 2. The Assessee submits that each of the above grounds/sub-grounds are in the alternative and without prejudice to one another.