9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (4) TMI 711X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssment in this case was originally completed under section 143(3) on 31-12-2007. Thereafter, on perusal of the records of the case, the Commissioner of Income-tax came to a finding that the assessing authority has not considered certain issues while passing the assessment order. On the basis of the above finding, he issued a show cause notice under section 263 on 5-3-2010. Detailed objections were filed by the assessee. Those objections were over-ruled by the Commissioner of Income-tax and the revision order was passed on 29-3-2010. 3. The Commissioner of Income-tax has concluded that the following issues were not examined by the assessing authority in the course of assessment proceedings:- 1. Interest free advance. 2 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t the assessee-company has made interest-free advances to its sister concern and thereby claimed interest expenditure, which was not in fact incurred for the purpose of the assessee-company. The partnership firm is M/s.Tiger Agency. The advance of ₹ 1,818.42 lakhs, reflected in the balance-sheet, was in fact the opening balance subsisting in the account since 1-4-2004. No fresh advances were made during the impugned previous year. The assessee has stated that the advances were given in the earlier years out of business expediency and also out of own funds. The assessee has categorically stated that advances were not given out of the borrowed funds. In fact, this issue was considered by the Tribunal in assessee s own case for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ne. It is the case of the assessee that excess income were offered by the assessee in earlier assessment years and those excess income were reversed in the current previous year and it is those amounts that are treated by the Commissioner of Income-tax as prior period expenditure held to be inadmissible. These are all in fact reversal of prior period adjustments by which the assessee had offered income for taxation. It is also the case of the assessee that all these matters have been thoroughly examined by the assessing authority. The contentions of the assessee are forceful in this regard. 11. The next ground raised by the assessee relates to the issue of disallowances directed under section 43B of the Act. The issue is raised in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ctually paid so as to satisfy the conditions laid down in section 43B. In these circumstances, as rightly argued by the assessee, there is no reason to make the disallowance under section 43B, as proposed by the Commissioner of Income-tax. 13. The next ground relates to the issue of sale of capital assets. The grounds raised by the assessee are that the Commissioner of Income-tax ought to have appreciated that the Assessing Officer had taken the sale consideration on sale of land as returned by the assessee only after due verification and after verifying the guideline value prescribed under section 50C. This is stated in ground No.9.1. Ground No.9.2 is that the Commissioner of Income-tax ought to have held that the order of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... earsay. The assessee has made explanations on the basis of details available on record. The Commissioner of Income-tax, on the other hand, has brushed aside all these issues from the legal point of view without considering the facts of the case and has overlooked the fact that all the claims were permissible within the law itself. Therefore, on the merit of the issues pointed out by the Commissioner of Income-tax, the assessee has already established its case. Therefore, the directions given by the Commissioner of Income-tax may not survive in law on the merits of those issues themselves. This is anyhow not applicable to the issues of difference between the transport turnover in the sales-tax assessment order and as offered to income-tax an ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessing authority has not applied her mind while passing the assessment order. The Assessing Officer has resorted to exhaustive procedure to complete the scrutiny assessment made under section 143(3). Therefore, it is not possible to hold a view that the assessment order is erroneous. 21. In addition to the above legal position, it is to be seen that in respect of the observations made by the Commissioner of Income-tax, the assessee has explained everything in a detailed manner on the basis of the details available on record. 22. In the facts and circumstances of the case, we find that except for those items not pressed by the assessee in the course of hearing, it is not possible to hold that the assessment order is erroneous and ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
