1999 (11) TMI 739

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... n 143(1)( a ). Subsequently, he issued notice under section 154 of the Act with a view to rectify the intimation sent under section 143(1)( a ) of the Act and to make prima facie adjustment in respect of depreciation and investment allowance. No compliance was made by the assessee in response to the notice under section 154 of the Act. Consequently, the Assessing Officer rectified the said intimation and made prima facie adjustment regarding depreciation and investment allowance as under : "Loss already assessed : Rs. 26,01,860 Deduct : (1) Dep. as discussed above as her revised dep. chart allowed in excess. Rs. 8,85,830 (2) .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... section 143(1)( a ), did not arise. With the aforesaid observations and findings the learned CIT(A) cancelled the additional tax levied at Rs. 94,752. 4. Aggrieved the revenue has come up in second appeal before this Tribunal. 5. The learned DR supported the order of the Assessing Officer and contended that the prima facie adjustment was proper and justified and the assessee was liable to tax as per section 143(1)( a ) of the Act. He argued that the amount of reduction in the disclosed loss had to be treated as income for the purpose of levy of additional tax as per amended provision of section 143(1)( a ) of the Act. 6. The learned ARs. of the assessee, on the other hand submitted that the issue of notice under section 154 o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... t as legally untenable and invalid (sic). 8. The learned ARs. also submitted that since there was loss even after the aforesaid prima facie adjustment, no additional tax could be levied in the case. He relied on the decision reported in [1998] 232 ITR 592. 9. We have considered the aforesaid facts of the case, materials on the file and the submissions of the rival parties. We are of the view that the learned CIT(A) was justified in cancelling the levy of additional tax under section 143(1)( a ) of the Act. The learned CIT(A) found that the error in the figure of WDV and consequent excess claim of depreciation could not have been found on the basis of materials in the return and in fact the error was discovered from the past record .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X