9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (3) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hority, subject to, factual verification. In the facts of the present appeal, revised claim of the assessee qua deduction claimed under Section 43B of the Act has been rejected by learned first appellate authority simply due to lack of supporting evidences. Without entering into the controversy, whether the assessee has filed the supporting evidences qua its revised claim of deduction under Section 43B of the Act, we are inclined to restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for examining the claim of deduction made by the assessee under Section 43B of the Act in the revised computation of income based on the evidences available on record. Thus liberty is granted to the assessee to furnish any other evidence before the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y ₹ 37,13,814/- as deduction towards payment of opening statutory liability. CIT(A) erred in not allowing correction of inadvertent error in computation due to juxtaposition of claim and disallowance numbers arising under section 43B. 3. The CIT(A) erred in holding that the submission does not have any evidence or documents as annexures to substantiate the claim of assessee whereas the appellant duly attached extract of the tax audit report having the correct claim and neither further documents were demanded from the Appellant nor opportunity to furnish additional evidences were provided to the appellant by AO or CIT(A). 4. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the correct amount of deduction and disallowance were rightly men ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n course of assessment proceeding, the assessee having discovered that it has erroneously disallowed the amount of ₹ 1,53,89,254/- under Section 43B of the Act, as, the amount was actually paid before the due date of filing of return of income, whereas, it has claimed deduction of ₹ 37,13,814/-, the amount actually required to be disallowed, filed a revised computation of income revising its claim of deduction under Section 43B of the Act. However, while completing the assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 21.12.2017, the Assessing Officer completely ignored the revised computation of income filed in course of assessment proceeding and proceeded to compute the income as per the revised return of income file ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een considered by the departmental authorities, the issue can be restored back to the Assessing Officer for re-examination. 7. Having considered rival submissions, we find, the fact that the assessee has made revised claim of deduction under Section 43B of the Act amounting to ₹ 1,53,89,254/- in course of assessment proceeding is not disputed. It is further observed, while the Assessing Officer has completely ignored the revised claim of the assessee, learned Commissioner (Appeals) has refused to entertain it on the ground that supporting evidences were not filed at any stage. Now, it is fairly well settled, though, before the Assessing Officer, the Assessee can make a revised claim only through a revised return of income filed und ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
