Kumar Properties and Real Estate Pvt.Ltd, Pune V. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle - 14, Pune

MA 395/PUN/2022

• Counselvise Citation: [2023] 100 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5212 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 10 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 20-11-2023
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 16-11-2023
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 27-12-2022
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH “A”, PUNE BEFORE SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. No.395/PUN/2022 (Arising out of ITA No.684/PUN/2018) िनधाᭅरण वषᭅ / Assessment Year : 2014-15 Kumar Properties and Real Estate Pvt. Ltd., 1 st Floor, Kumar Capital, East Street, Camp, Pune- 411001. PAN : AAACK7490H Vs. DCIT, Circle-14, Pune. Appellant Respondent आदेश / ORDER PER INTURI RAMA RAO, AM: This present Miscellaneous Application is filed by the assessee seeking the modification of the order passed by this Tribunal in ITA No.684/PUN/2018 for the assessment year 2014-15 dated 25.08.2022 on the ground that this Tribunal had failed to adjudicate the ground of appeal nos.15 and 16, wherein, the assessee had challenged the direction of the ld. CIT(A) to the Assessing Officer to reduce the cost of construction from Rs.8,70,76,854/- to closing work in progress. Secondly, the Tribunal had wrongly mentioned the provisions for expenses of Assessee by : Shri Rajan Vora Revenue by : Shri A. K. Mahala Date of hearing : 17.11.2023 Date of pronouncement : 21.11.2023 MA No.395/PUN/2022 2 Rs.2,03,08,768/- as against Rs.2,35,60,537/- in para 15 to 17 of the impugned order of the Tribunal (supra). 2. We had carefully gone through the averments made in the present Miscellaneous Petition and find that the Tribunal had failed to give a finding on the ground of appeal nos.15 and 16. On perusal of the impugned order, it is clear that the ld. CIT(A) while directing the Assessing Officer not to make the disallowance of cost of construction of Rs.8,70,76,854/- had directed the Assessing Officer to reduce it from closing work in progress, as the same was debited in the Profit & Loss Account. This direction of the ld. CIT(A), in our considered opinion, is outside the scope of the subject matter of appeal before the ld. CIT(A). Accordingly, we are of the considered opinion that the findings of the ld. CIT(A) to the extent that the cost of construction of Rs.8,70,76,854/- be reduced from the closing work in progress are vacated. 3. As regards second averment in the Miscellaneous Petition that the Tribunal had wrongly mentioned the provisions for expenses of Rs.2,03,08,768/- as against Rs.2,35,60,537/- in para 15 to 17 of the impugned order, the word “provisions for expenses of Rs.2,03,08,768/-”, the word “provisions for expenses of Rs.2,35,60,537/-” shall be substituted. We order accordingly. MA No.395/PUN/2022 3 4. In the result, the Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee stands allowed. Order pronounced on this 21 st day of November, 2023. Sd/- Sd/- (S. S. VISWANETHRA RAVI) (INTURI RAMA RAO) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER पुणे / Pune; ᳰदनांक / Dated : 21 st November, 2023. Sujeet आदेश कᳱ ᮧितिलिप अᮕेिषत / Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथᱮ / The Appellant. 2. ᮧ᭜यथᱮ / The Respondent. 3. The CIT(A)-7, Pune. 4. The Pr. CIT-6, Pune. 5. िवभागीय ᮧितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, “A” बᱶच, पुणे / DR, ITAT, “A” Bench, Pune. 6. गाडᭅ फ़ाइल / Guard File. आदेशानुसार / BY ORDER, // True Copy // Senior Private Secretary आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, पुणे / ITAT, Pune.