9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 785X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2010-11. Since the assessee has settled the amount at GBP 12,14,022, we are of the view, of course subject to verification, that the income that should be considered in the hands of the assessee should not exceed the rupee equivalent of GBP 12,14,022 as per the Settlement agreement. As already noticed that the Ld CIT(A) took the view to assess the entire amount of income in AY 2009-10 only for the reason that the assessee has failed to furnish the details. The submissions of the assessee that the settlement was reached on 09-04-2009 and it has offered the entire amount of rupee equivalent of GBP 12,14,022 in AY 2010-11 are new facts that were not available before Ld CIT(A). Hence, in our view, the questions of ‘year of accrual’ and/or ‘year of assessment’ are to be considered afresh at the end of the Ld CIT(A) in the light of new facts brought on record by the assessee. Thus set aside the order of Ld CIT(A) with regard to the assessment of GBP 14,78,484 or as the case may be GBP 12,14,022 and restore the same to his file with the direction to examine about the assessability of the same afresh, i.e., year of accrual and/or year of assessment, in the light of the facts surroundin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hough the assessee stated that the above said amount of GBP 14,78,484 relates to the assessment years 2006-07 to 2009-10, yet it failed to furnish the break up details. The Ld CIT(A) also asked the AO to produce the return of income filed by the assessee for AY 2007-08 to 2008-09. But the AO expressed his inability to produce the same, as the assessee had filed the returns of income through e-filing method and further they have been were processed u/s 143(1) of the Act through automated system. Under these set of facts, the Ld CIT(A) concluded that the entire amount of GBP 14,78,484 should be assessed as the income of the year under consideration. By adopting the conversion of ₹ 68.1531 per GBP, the Ld CIT(A) enhanced total income by ₹ 10.07 crores. Aggrieved by the enhancement of income ordered by Ld CIT(A), the assessee has filed this appeal challenging the same on various grounds. The revenue is aggrieved by the decision of Ld CIT(A) in holding that the entire amount is assessable as the income of AY 2009-10. According to the revenue, the Ld CIT(A) should have directed the AO to assess the income in the respective year from AY 2005-06 to 2009-10 on the basis of accru ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) (c) CIT Vs. Kanpur Coal Syndicate (53 ITR 229)(SC). 6. We have carefully considered the decision rendered by Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Raj Bahadur Hardutroty Motilal Chamaria (supra). Following observations made by Hon ble Apex Court are relevant:- As we have already stated, it is not open to the Appellate Assistant Commissioner to travel outside the record, i.e., the return made by the assessee or the assessment order of the Income tax Officer with a view to find out new sources of income and the power of enhancement under section 31(3) of the Act is restricted to the sources of income which have been the subject matter of consideration by the Income tax Officer from the point of view of taxability. In this context consideration does not mean incidental or collateral examination of any matter by the Income tax Officer in the process of assessment. There must be something in the assessment order to show that the Income tax Officer applied his mind to the particular subject-matter or the particular source of income with a view to its taxability or to its non-taxability and not to any incidental connection In the instant case, there cannot be any dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e has been considered by the assessing officer while completing the assessment of the year under consideration. 10. At this juncture, we prefer to give an illustration in order to understand the issue relating to source of income . Let us presume that an assessee, say M/s XYZ sells goods to five parties viz., A, B, C, D and E. There should not be any dispute that the source of income of M/s XYZ is the income derived on selling of goods. Let us further presume that a dispute arises between M/s XYZ and E , consequent thereto M/s XYZ did not recognize the income arising from the sale made to E . Let us assume that the assessing officer did not consider the same and Ld CIT(A) proposes enhancement for considering the income arising from the sale made to E . Can it be said that the sale made to E should be considered as a separate source of income?. Since the source of income of the assessee is selling of goods and further since the assessee has offered the income arising from the sales made to A, B, C and D, in our view, the income arising from sale made to E cannot be considered as separate source of income, since the same was simply one of the leafs of same source of income a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment year 2009-10. Accordingly he submitted that the addition made by Ld CIT(A) is liable to be deleted. The Ld A.R further submitted that the assessee has been disclosing the amount due from M/s India Value Investment Ltd in its annual accounts every year since the assessment years 2006-07 onwards and hence the Ld CIT(A) was not correct in law in presuming that the aggregate amount due was assessable fully in the year under consideration, i.e., AY 2009-10. 12. The Ld D.R submitted that the assessee has not only failed to furnish the year wise break-up details of the income due from M/s India Value Investment Ltd, but also failed to inform the Ld CIT(A) about the settlement reached on 09.04.2009 and also about the income offered in AY 2010-11. 13. We have heard the parties on this issue and perused the record. According to Ld A.R, the assessee has reached settlement with M/s India Value Investment Ltd with regard to the Investment Advisory fee received from them on 09-04-2009 and the amount due from them was settled at GBP 12,14,022. According to Ld A.R, the assessee has offered the rupee equivalent of the above said amount in AY 2010-11. Since the assessee has settled t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
