9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1094X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... change of opinion. May be that an angle or an element of the claim may not have been directly addressed by the Assessing Officer during the original assessment to the satisfaction of the present Assessing Officer, nevertheless, same cannot be a ground for reopening of the assessment which was previously framed after scrutiny. - Decided in favour of assessee. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ort of such audit in the prescribed form No. 10CCB duly signed and verified by a Chartered Accountant which shall accompany the profit & loss account and balance sheet of the eligible undertaking as if the undertaking were a distinct entity. In the case of CIT V/s. Shivanand Electronics (209 ITR 63) (Bombay) it was held that no duty is cast on the Assessing Officer to ask an assessee who has failed to file the audit report before rejecting his claim for relief. 4. On verification of the records, it is seen that the assessee has not submitted separate profit & loss accounts and balance sheet of the undertaking relevant to the Assessment Year for which the deduction u/.s 801A has been claimed. In absence of separate profit & loss account a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shment / administrative expenses etc have not been distributed between both the business, so as to arrive correct profit of the business of each of the undertaking. II. Since, these expenditure have not been distributed between two business, the profit in windmill division has artificially gone up. Hence, the common expenses in nature of administrative expenses and financial charges need to be allocated between both lines of business in order to arrive at correct profit of each of the business. Since, one line of business is of electronic appliances which involve both trading and manufacturing concern the ratio of turnover only cannot be considered owing to the differences in the basic character of both the business. The following common ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 77; 47,76,797/and total turnover of windmill division is ₹ 14,48,14,478/- 4,96,09,086 x 47,76,797// 14.48,14,478/= 16,36,387/- In view of the above discussion and calculation a further expenses of ₹ 16,36,387/should have been attributed to the windmill division for the purpose of correct working of deduction u/s. 80IA of the IT. Act. Therefore, excess deduction u/s. 801A of the IT. Act has been allowed to the extent of ₹ 16,36,387/- 6. In view of the above discussion, I have reasons to believe that income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment for the abovementioned assessment year within the meaning of Sec. 147 of the IT. Act. Therefore, this is a fit case for issue for notice u/s. 148 of the IT. Act." 3. In ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessing Officer thus acted on audit objection which was not permissible. 6. Learned counsel Shri Bhatt countered these arguments and submitted that the Assessing Officer has recorded satisfactory reasons. Notice has been issued within a period of four years from the end of relevant assessment and and reassessment therefore, is permissible. 7. Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the documents on record, it becomes clear that the assessee's claim for deduction under section 80IA of the Act was examined by the Assessing Officer minutely during the scrutiny assessment proceedings. He has given detailed reasons for reducing the claim by ₹ 3.8 lacs and accepting the rest of the claim. Any attempt now on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
