9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The correctness and legality of the order passed by the Tribunal, Bangalore Bench, in IT(SS)A No. 70/Bang/2004. Issue 1: The Tribunal's failure to consider crucial facts regarding the maintenance of annual returns before the RoC, impacting the claim of regular books of accounts being maintained before the date of search in the normal course of business. Details: The assessee filed a return of income for the block assessment period after a search was conducted. The AO disallowed a claim made by the assessee for a refund, leading to an appeal before the CIT(A) and subsequently before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, which is now challenged. The appellant argues that the books of accounts were regularly maintained, returns were filed before the RoC, and the unabsorbed depreciation and losses should be set off for computing total undisclosed income. Issue 2: The rejection of the claim for deduction of unabsorbed depreciation and losses against the income for relevant assessment years during block assessment. Details: The AO rejected the claim based on a retrospective amendment to the Act. The appellate authority and the Tribunal upheld this decision. The appellant contends that the losses and unabsorbed depreciation should be set off, citing a Supreme Court judgment in a similar case. Judgment: The High Court reframed the substantial question of law to determine whether the AO was correct in rejecting the claim for set off of loss and unabsorbed depreciation. Citing the Supreme Court's decision, the Court held in favor of the assessee, directing the AO to quantify the entitlement of set off. The appeal was allowed, with no costs imposed.
|
