9911796707
TMI Blog2021 (1) TMI 579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... error is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. When VAT is not routed through the profit and loss account, the assessee could not have claimed this amount it as a deduction. VAT is not debited to the profit and loss account. When VAT is not claimed as a deduction, while computing the income, the question of disallowing the same u/s 44AB of the Act, does not arise. Thus, in our considered view, the id. Pr. CIT has committed an error in not examining the issue by himself before coming to the conclusion that there is an error which is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, which requires revision, by invocation of powers u/s 263 - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 1662/Kol/2019 9Assessment Year: 2014–15) - - - Dated:- 25 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A/R, submitted a written submission on 11.03.2019 along with power of attorney, on behalf of the assessee. the submission has been considered carefully but the same has been found without merit as the TAR column 26B(b) specifically mentions In respect of any sum referred to in clause (a), (b), (c), (d),or (f) of section 43B the liability for which was incurred in the previous year and was not paid on or before the aforesaid date. The above statement means that the Auditor has certified that the amount of ₹ 1,96,26,619/- towards VAT liability tantamount to violation of provisions of section 43B and the same should have disallowed by the Auditor himself from the calculation of net profit of business of the assessee. further, the Trad ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... D/R, on the other hand, submitted that this fact required to be properly verified by the Assessing Officer and not doing so is non-application of mind. He argued that the order passed by the Assessing Officer was without enquiry and without application of mind and hence the same is an erroneous order. He vehemently contended that there is not prejudice caused to the assessee as the Assessing Officer was directed to conduct a fresh assessment on a priority basis and complete the same preferably within three months after giving the assessee adequate opportunity of being heard. 5. After hearing rival contentions, we find that the tax auditor in the report issued u/s 44AB of the Act, has clearly stated that the indirect tax are not routed th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
