9911796707
|
Home
Issues involved:
The judgment deals with the issue of the Revenue being aggrieved by the first appellate authority's decision to allow a claim of Rs. 7,95,38,030/- as set off brought forward losses, even though the assessee had not claimed such set off in its return. Summary: Issue 1: Allowance of Claim of Set Off Brought Forward Losses The Revenue contested the first appellate authority's decision to allow the claim of Rs. 7,95,38,030/- as set off brought forward losses, arguing that the assessee had not claimed such set off in its return. The learned CIT(A) had correctly computed the total income at nil figure based on the appellant's return of income and accompanying documents. The A.O. had not provided any justification for not allowing the set off of brought forward losses against the income of the current year. The learned CIT(A) emphasized the limitations of the A.O.'s powers under section 143(1)(a) of the Act, stating that prima facie adjustments are permissible only for claims that are prima facie incorrect. The A.O. was directed to allow the impugned claim by deleting the unlawful prima facie adjustment. The Tribunal found that the assessee had correctly mentioned the amount of brought forward losses to be set off and that the impugned claim was not prima facie incorrect. The Revenue failed to point out any specific infirmity in the stand of the learned CIT(A), leading to the dismissal of the appeal. In conclusion, the Tribunal affirmed the decision of the learned CIT(A) to allow the claim of set off brought forward losses and dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. This judgment highlights the importance of adhering to the provisions of the Income Tax Act and the limitations of the Assessing Officer's powers under section 143(1)(a) when making adjustments to claims in the return of income. The decision emphasizes the need for proper justification and notice before disallowing claims, especially when they are not prima facie incorrect.
|
