9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (5) TMI 2038X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... me. The AO without pointing out any infirmity in the said return computed the total income taking the figures of total income declared by the assessee in its original return. We find merit in the contention of CIT (A) has rightly directed the AO to compute the income of the assessee on the basis of the income declared by the assessee in the revised return and delete the addition of ₹ 1,45,47,670/-. Hence, in our considered view, the finding of the Ld. CIT (A) does not require any interference by this Tribunal. We therefore uphold the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) and dismiss this ground of appeal of the revenue. - ITA No. 29/NAG/2015 - - - Dated:- 8-5-2018 - SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA (AM) AND SHRI RAM LAL NEGI (JM) For the Revenue : ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssed u/s 143 (1) of the Act and the refund of ₹ 16,50,150/- was adjusted against the demand for the assessment year 2010-11. Since the case was selected for scrutiny the AO issued notice u/s 143 (2) and 142 (1) and in response thereof the authorized representative attended the proceedings from time to time. The assessee bank also filed revised return declaring the total income of ₹ 13,83,57,280/-. After hearing the assessee the AO made addition of ₹ 1,00,00,000/- on account of provisions on NPA and ₹ 24,94,46,361/- on account of overdue interest and assessed the total income of the assessee at ₹ 41,23,51,310/-, considering the total income of the assessee as per income declared at ₹ 15,29,04,950/- in its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come and the assessee neither furnished the required reasons before the Assessing Officer nor the CIT (Appeals). 4. The coordinate Bench after hearing the parties dismissed ground No. 1 and 2 by upholding the findings of the Ld. CIT (A) vide order dated17.06.2016. 5. As regards ground No 3 the Ld. Departmental Representative (DR) relying on the assessment order submitted before us that the Ld. CIT (A) has wrongly directed the AO to compute the total income of the assessee as per the income of ₹ 13,83,57,275/-declared by the assessee in revised return as against the income of ₹ 15,29,04,950/- declared by the assessee in its original return. 6. The Ld. counsel for the assessee submitted that the AO has wrongly computed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
