9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (4) TMI 1056X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct. 2.2. There was a delay of 58 days in filing the appeal. The assessee filed a petition for condonation of delay stating that the person, who is handling appeal papers, i.e. Mr.P.Viswanathan, Manager, Accounts of the Company, suffered from leptospirosis fever and he was not available to take up the case with the assessee's counsel and that cause for delay. To this effect, the assessee also filed the medical certificate dated 16.08.2014 from Kerala Ayurvedic Treatment Center, Anna Nagar West, Chennai-40. We have gone through the condonation petition filed by the assessee. Reasons shown are justified and hence, delay is condoned and appeal admitted. 3.1 The Brief facts of the case are that the filed its return of income admitting its inco ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ncome or Explanation 1.-Where in respect of any facts material to the computation of the total income of any person under this Act,- (A) such person fails to offer an explanation or offers an explanation which is found by the Assessing] Officer or the Commissioner (Appeals) or the Commissioner to be false, or (B) such person offers an explanation which he is not able to substantiate [and fails to prove that such explanation is bona fide and that all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of his total income have been disclosed by him, then, the amount added or disallowed in computing the total income of such person as a result thereof shall, for the purposes of clause (c) of this sub-section, be deemed to rep ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt deduction are not acceptable under the provisions of the law. A wrong claim should not become the base for the business reserves of a company. 3.2 Further the Ld.CIT(A) observed that with regard to Explanation to s.271(1)(c), the appellant has furnished the explanation but it is not satisfactory. The appellant has not given any reason why the depreciation was not worked out as per l.T. Rules and not claimed even though knowing fully well that it is eligible for higher quantum of depreciation. The appellant is aware that claiming of more quantum of eligible depreciation will reduce their eligible deduction u/s 8OlB, therefore, it has claimed only a lesser quantum of depreciation per Companies Act. This shows willful attempt to claim more ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons/disallowances made under the normal provisions and for this purpose, he also relied on the Circular of the CBDT Circular No.25/15/ F.No.279/140/2015/ITJ dated 31.12.2015. Further, we come across the decision of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of M/s.Sri Gokulam Hotels India Pvt. Ltd., reported in 232 Taxmann 487(Mds.) wherein confirmed the findings of the Tribunal by observing that in an admitted case of 'nil' return, without complying with the provisions of Section 115 JB, where the assessee is liable to pay MAT and the non-compliance thereof results in imposition of penalty in terms of Section 271(1)(c), is correct. The Tribunal also found that only on account of the Assessing Officer's endeavour, the MAT liabili ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
