MR. RAJENDRA BHAGIRTH TAPADIA,PUNE vs. DEPUTY COMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CENTRAL CIRCLE 2(2), PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1445/PUN/2023Status: DisposedITAT Pune13 February 2024AY 2014-15Bench: SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, HON. (Accountant Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal decided to remand the matter back to the CIT(A) for adjudicating an alternative ground of appeal that was not previously decided. This ground concerned the allowance of interest against interest income earned from deposits made from the same funds.

What were the facts?

The assessee's return was selected for scrutiny, and the AO made additions for insurance premium perquisites and disallowed interest on house property income. The CIT(A) deleted the perquisite addition but confirmed the interest disallowance.

What were the issues?

Whether an alternative ground of appeal, not adjudicated by the lower appellate authority, should be remanded for fresh consideration. The specific issue raised in the alternative ground relates to the allowability of interest against interest income.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Not explicitly mentioned in the provided text

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE „SMC‟ BENCHES :: PUNE

For Appellant: Shri Kiran Sanmane, CA
For Respondent: Shri Ganesh B. Budruk, DR
Hearing: 12/02/2024Pronounced: 13/02/2024

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE „SMC‟ BENCHES :: PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, HON. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (A.Y. 2014-15) Rajendra Bhagirath Tapadia, vs DCIT, Circle-2(2), A Symphony, 210, Ashok Pune. Nagar, Range Hills Road, Pune-411020. PAN: AAJPT 0502 B Appellant Respondent Assessee by : Shri Kiran Sanmane, CA Revenue by : Shri Ganesh B. Budruk, DR Date of hearing : 12/02/2024 Date of pronouncement : 13/02/2024 ORDER

This appeal preferred by the assessee emanates from the order of Commissioner of Income Tax [Appeals]-12, Pune (for short, „CIT(A)‟), dated 11.12.2023 for A.Y.2014-15.

2.

Brief facts of the case are that assessee is an individual deriving income from „salary‟; „house property‟ and from „other sources‟. Return of income for the A.Y. 2014-15 was filed on 29/07/2014 declaring total income of Rs. 54,16,750/-. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS. The assessment was completed by the Assessing Officer (AO) vide order dated 07/10/2016 at a total income of Rs.94,73,200/-. While doing so, the AO made addition on account of perquisites in the form of insurance premium of Rs. 20 lac and Rajendra Bhagirath Tapadia disallowed interest claimed against income from house property of Rs.20,56,453/-.

3.

Being aggrieved by the order of the AO, assessee filed appeal before the ld. CIT(A), who vide impugned order, deleted the addition on account of value of perquisites on insurance premium, however, confirmed the disallowance of interest claimed under the head „income from house property‟.

4.

Aggrieved by the order of the ld. CIT(A), the assessee is in appeal before this Tribunal. Ground No.1 of appeal was not pressed during the course of hearing, therefore, same is dismissed. Regarding ground No.2, it is submitted that though this alternative ground was raised before the ld. CIT(A), the same was not adjudicate by him. Therefore, it is submitted that the matter may be remanded to the file of ld. CIT(A) for disposal of alternative ground of appeal raised. On the other hand, ld.Sr.DR has no serious objection for remanding the matter to the ld. CIT(A) for disposal of alternative ground.

5. Having heard the rival submissions, I am of the considered opinion that this is a fit case to remand the issue to the file of the ld.CIT(A) for limited purpose of adjudicating alternative ground raised by the assessee, which was raised as ground No.3 in Form No.35 of appeal memo, reads as under:-

Rajendra Bhagirath Tapadia “Without prejudice to ground No.2, alternatively, the AO ought to have allowed the interest of Rs. 20,56,453/- against the interest income earned by the assessee by keeping deposits out of said funds and included under the head income from other sources” Therefore, the impugned order passed by the ld. CIT(A) on this issue is set aside and remand the matter back to the file of ld. CIT(A) to decide the alternative ground in accordance with law after providing reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee.

6.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in open Court on 13th February, 2024.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →