9911796707
|
Home
Issues Involved:
1. Legality of reassessment under Section 148 of the IT Act. 2. Justification of addition of Rs. 8,54,764 on account of interest receivable from M/s Arihant Cotsyn Ltd. Issue-wise Detailed Analysis: 1. Legality of reassessment under Section 148 of the IT Act: The assessee contended that the reassessment by issuance of notice under Section 148 was invalid due to the lack of application of mind by the assessing authority. The return for the assessment year 1999-2000 was filed on 2nd Nov 1999, and processed under Section 143(1) on 24th March 2001. The AO initiated proceedings under Sections 147/148 on 29th Aug 2001, based on the interest income of Rs. 8,54,764.30 declared from M/s Arihant Cotsyn Ltd. for the assessment year 1999-2000 in the return for the assessment year 2000-01. The TDS certificate indicated that the interest pertained to the period from 1st April 1998 to 31st March 1999, relevant to the assessment year 1999-2000, but was declared in the assessment year 2000-01. The AO believed that the interest income had escaped assessment, thus forming a prima facie view to initiate proceedings under Section 147. The Tribunal held that the AO was justified in initiating proceedings under Section 148, as the AO had reason to believe that income chargeable to tax had escaped assessment due to the omission or failure on the part of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts necessary for assessment. 2. Justification of addition of Rs. 8,54,764 on account of interest receivable from M/s Arihant Cotsyn Ltd: The assessee argued that the addition of Rs. 8,54,764 on account of interest receivable was uncalled for, as the interest income did not accrue in the financial year relevant to the assessment year 1999-2000. The assessee maintained that the principal amount was not recoverable, and the accounts were not finalized. The assessee followed the mercantile system of accounting and contended that income and expenditure should be accounted for only when settled and determined. The AO, however, added the interest income based on the TDS certificate and the post-dated cheques issued by M/s Arihant Cotsyn Ltd. The CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, stating that the TDS was deducted for the period under appeal, and the interest income shown in the next assessment year indicated that it had accrued. The Tribunal, however, found that the interest income did not accrue in the assessment year 1999-2000. The Tribunal noted that both parties did not make any entry of the interest amount up to 31st March 1999, and M/s Arihant Cotsyn Ltd. credited the interest amount for the first time on 6th July 1999. The TDS payment was made on 18th Nov 1999, and the confirmation of interest was not within the knowledge of the assessee before filing the return on 2nd Nov 1999. The Tribunal held that the decision not to debit the interest was directly related to business expediency, as the recovery of the principal amount was doubtful. The Tribunal relied on the decisions of the Hon'ble Rajasthan High Court in CIT vs. Banswara Fabrics Ltd. and the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in Jwala Prasad Radha Krishna vs. CIT, which supported the assessee's claim that interest income did not accrue when the recovery of the principal amount was doubtful. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the orders of the authorities below and deleted the addition of Rs. 8,54,764. Conclusion: The appeal was partly allowed, with the Tribunal holding that the initiation of proceedings under Section 148 was justified, but the addition of Rs. 8,54,764 on account of interest receivable was unwarranted and was deleted.
|
