9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (8) TMI 819 - AT - Income TaxAssessment u/s 153C - HELD THAT - Search was carried out in the case of M/s. Adarsh Developers and incriminating documents were found and seized in the course of search and those incriminating documents had a bearing on the assessee s total income and therefore, AO of the searched person has recorded his satisfaction and provided the seized material to the AO of the assessee. No infirmity in the order of CIT(A) in both years as per which it was held by CIT(A) that there is no merit in this claim of the assessee that there was lack of jurisdiction and that legal requirements were not complied with and the principles of law were not applied and hence, on this issue, we decline to interfere in the order of CIT(A) on this issue in both the years and accordingly, ground No.3 is rejected in both years. Set off of brought forward losses - addition made by the AO u/s 14A - HELD THAT - Quantum of loss for the present year is dependent upon the decision of CIT(A) in the first appeal for AY 2010-11 in which the assessee has challenged the addition made by the AO u/s 14A. Similarly, the Assessment Order for Assessment Year 2011-12 is available and as per the same, the assessee claimed loss in this year but the AO made addition u/s 14A of the Act and determined the net loss for that year and hence, the quantum of loss for the present year year is also dependent upon the decision of CIT(A) in first appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12 which is still pending before learned CIT(A). Quantum of carry forward of loss in the present year is also depending upon the final decision of CIT(A) in Assessment Year 2012-13 which is still pending before CIT(A). Assessment Order for Assessment Year 2012-14 and as per the same, the assessee declared a positive income which is accepted by the AO as no addition was made in this year but as against the claim of the assessee for higher amount of brought forward losses for earlier three years as noted above, the AO set off the losses determined by him as carry forward in Assessment Year 2012-13 and determined the net taxable income for this year and therefore, the final amount of carry forward of losses for the present year is also depending upon the decision of CIT(A) in the first appeal for this year and earlier three years which are still pending before CIT(A). Not allowing MAT credit under section 115JAA - HELD THAT - Decision of both lower authorities that no MAT credit is available but since the assessee has claimed brought forward losses in Assessment Year 2014-15 which is held to be Nil by the AO as per the AO, the amount of MAT credit available in the present year is also depending upon the result in the earlier years which are pending before learned CIT(A). Hence, we feel it proper to restore back for a fresh decision. Appeals of the assessee are partly allowed for statistical purposes.
Issues Involved:
- Appeal against orders of CIT(A)-11, Bengaluru for Assessment Years 2014-15 and 2015-16 - Dismissal of appeal and confirmation of Assessing Officer's order - Setoff of brought forward losses - MAT credit under section 115JAA - Jurisdiction assumption under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961 - Levy of interest under sections 234B & 234C Detailed Analysis: 1. Jurisdiction Assumption under Section 153C: - The issue raised by the assessee was regarding the assumption of jurisdiction by the Assessing Officer (AO) under section 153C of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The AO issued notices under section 153C based on incriminating documents seized during a search at the premises of another entity. The contention was that the satisfaction recorded by the AO of the searched person was not proper, questioning the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the present AO. - The CIT(A) found that the search yielded incriminating documents relevant to the assessee's income, leading to the AO's satisfaction and subsequent notices. The CIT(A) concluded that the legal procedures were followed, and the AO had jurisdiction over the case. The Tribunal declined to interfere with the CIT(A)'s decision, upholding the validity of the jurisdiction assumed by the AO. 2. Setoff of Brought Forward Losses: - The assessee challenged the AO's decision to disallow the setoff of brought forward losses for Assessment Year 2014-15. The quantum of loss for the year was dependent on previous years' decisions, with pending appeals for Assessment Years 2010-11 to 2013-14. Similarly, the issue of MAT credit under section 115JAA was intertwined with the outcome of previous years' appeals. - The Tribunal noted that the final amount of carry forward losses for the year in question was contingent on the pending decisions of the CIT(A) in the earlier years. Given this interdependence, the Tribunal decided to remand both issues on merit back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, to be made in conjunction with the pending appeals for the previous years. 3. MAT Credit under Section 115JAA: - In the case of the MAT credit under section 115JAA for Assessment Year 2014-15, the AO determined tax on book profit and regular tax under normal provisions. The lower authorities ruled out MAT credit due to the assessment of brought forward losses as Nil. The availability of MAT credit was linked to the outcome of the pending appeals for the earlier years before the CIT(A). - Consequently, the Tribunal decided to restore both the issues on merit back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision, to be made simultaneously with the decisions on the pending appeals for the earlier years. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, recognizing the interconnected nature of the issues across the assessment years. 4. Levy of Interest under Sections 234B & 234C: - The appeals did not specifically address the issue of the levy of interest under sections 234B & 234C. However, the Tribunal's decision to remand the issues on jurisdiction assumption, setoff of brought forward losses, and MAT credit for fresh consideration by the CIT(A) encompassed a comprehensive review of the entire assessment process, including any associated interest levies. In conclusion, the Tribunal partially allowed the assessee's appeals for statistical purposes, remanding the issues of jurisdiction assumption, setoff of brought forward losses, and MAT credit back to the CIT(A) for a fresh decision in alignment with the pending appeals for the earlier assessment years. The decision highlighted the interconnectedness of these issues and the importance of a holistic review of the assessment process.
|
