Masters Realty Pvt.Ltd, Pune V. Income-tax Officer, Ward - 14(4), Pune

ITA 408/PUN/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 118 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7730 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 10-01-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Next Hearing Date: 10-01-2019
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 28-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N O N E

Judgement Text

- IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH, PUNE , BEFORE SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JM . / ITA NO . 408 /P U N/201 8 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 4 - 15 MASTERS REALTY PVT. LTD., 101, NAYAN APARTMENT, ICS COLONY, BHOSALE NAGAR, PUNE 411007 PAN : AAECM1690H ....... / APPELLANT / V/S. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD 14(4), PUNE / RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : N O N E REVENUE BY : SHRI RAJESH GAWALI / DATE OF HEARING : 1 0 - 01 - 2019 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 10 - 01 - 2019 / ORDER PER VIKAS AWASTHY, JM : TH IS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 7, PUNE DATED 1 4 - 11 - 2017 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014 - 15. 2. THE FIRST NOTICE OF APPEAL WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD ON 29 - 10 - 2018 FOR 29 - 11 - 2018. THE NOTICE OF APPEAL WAS DULY SERVED AS IS 2 ITA NO . 408/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2014 - 15 EVIDENT FROM THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT AVAILABLE ON RECORD. H OWEVER, NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE DATE FIXED I.E. 29 - 11 - 2018. FRESH NOTICE OF HEARING OF THE APPEAL WAS ISSUED FOR 10 - 01 - 2019. THE SECOND NOTICE OF APPEAL WAS SENT TO THE ASSESSEE THROUGH RPAD ON 30 - 11 - 2018 FOR TODAY I.E. 10 - 01 - 2019. THE NOTICE WAS DULY SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE AS IS EVIDENT FROM THE ACKNOWLEDGMENT AVAILABLE ON FILE. DESPITE SERVICE OF SECOND NOTICE NEITHER THE ASSESSEE NOR ANY AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF ASSESSEE APPEARED TO REPRESENT THE CASE. N OR THERE IS ANY REQ UEST FOR ADJOURNMENT FROM THE ASSESSEE. IT APPEARS THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT KEEN TO PURSUE THE APPEAL. UNDER SUCH CIRCUMSTANCES WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF LD. DR AND THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. 3. THE ASSESSEE IN APPEAL HAS ASSAILED THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) BY RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE LOWER AUTHORITIES HAVE ERRED IN NOT ALLOWING THE SET OFF OF CARRIED FORWAR D BUSINESS LOSS AND CURRENT BUSINESS LOSS AGAINST THE INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES OF RS.3,87,540/ - . IT IS YOUR APPELLANT CLAIM THAT HE IS ENTITLED FOR THE SAME AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 72 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 4. SHRI RAJESH GAWALI REPRESENTING THE DEPARTMENT VEHEMENTLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THE LD. DR TO FURTHER STRENGTHEN HIS SUBMISSIONS RELIED ON FOLLOWING DECISIONS : I . DEVI ELECTRONICS (P.) LTD. VS. INCOME TAX OFFICER, 77 TAXMANN.COM 259 (BOM BAY); II . ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX VS. LAVISH APARTMENT (P.) LTD., 92 ITD 58 (DELHI). 3 ITA NO . 408/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2014 - 15 5. I HAVE HEARD THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE LD. DR AND HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS OF AUTHORITIES BELOW . THE ASSESSEE COMPANY IS NOT CARRYING ANY BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE HAS EARNED INCOME FROM RENTING OF THE PROPERTY AND THE SAME IS OFFERED TO TAX BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER THE HEAD INCOME FROM HOUSE PROPERTY. APART FROM ABOVE ASSESSEE HAS INTEREST INCOME OF RS.3,87,540/ - . EXPENSES IN RESPECT OF HOUSE PROPERTY HAVE ALREADY BEEN ALLOWED AS STANDARD DEDUCTION U/S. 24(A) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED EXPENDITURE IN RESPECT OF REMUNERATION TO DIRECTOR. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) REJECTED TH E CLAIM OF ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT SINCE THERE IS NO BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE, THERE IS NO QUESTION OF BUSINESS LOSS. THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 72 ALLOW SET OFF OF BUSINESS LOSS/CARRIED FORWARD BUSINESS LOSS AGAINST INCOME UNDER ANY HEAD (EXCEPT UNDER THE HEAD SALARIES). BUT TO CLAIM LOSS, THE ASSESSEE HAS TO SHOW BUSINESS ACTIVITY WAS CARRIED DURING PREVIOUS YEAR OR IN THE PAST WHICH RESULTED IN GENERATION OF LOSS. THERE IS NO MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD CONTROVERTING THE FINDINGS OF COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THEREFORE, I FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE IMPUGNED ORDER. ACCORDINGLY, THE IMPUGNED ORDER IS UPHELD AND THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THURSDAY, THE 10 TH DAY OF JANUARY, 2019 . SD/ - ( / VIKAS AWASTHY) / JUDICIAL MEMBER / PUNE; / DATED : 10 TH JANUARY, 2019 RK 4 ITA NO . 408/PUN/2018, A.Y. 2014 - 15 / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT. 2. / THE RESPONDENT. 3. ( ) / THE CIT(A) - 7, PUNE 4. THE PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX - 6, PUNE 5. , , - , / DR, ITAT, SMC BENCH, PUNE. 6. / GUARD FILE. / / // TRUE COPY// / BY ORDER, / PRIVATE SECRETARY, , / ITAT, PUNE