9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 1240X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Shri Rajpal Yadav, Judicial Member Revenue by: Shri M. K. Singh, Sr. D.R. Assessee by: Shri Sunil H. Talati, A.R. ORDER PER : RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER:- The revenue is in appeal before us against the order of Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax(A) dated 27th July, 2011 passed for Assessment Year 2005-06. 2. The solitary substantial grievance of the revenue is that Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in deleting the addition of Rs. 7 lacs which was added by the Assessing Officer on account of disallowance of retention money. 3. The brief facts of the case are that assesse has filed its return of income electronically on 24-10-2005 declaring total income of Rs. 41,60,580/-. The case of the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leting the addition of Rs.99,99,041/- made on account of retention money. 3. The brief facts of the case are that during the assessment proceedings the A.O. observed that the assessee has shown retention money of Rs.99,99,041/- which was excluded from the profit. The A.O. show caused the assessee. The assessee contended that the right to receive the retention money was not accrued to the assessee and hence the same was not shown in its income during the year under consideration. According to the A.O. the assessee was following Mercantile System of accounting and in Mercantile System of accounting the retention money is accrued to the assessee as soon the entries are posted in the books of account. He observed that the assessee itself ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hmedabad Bench in the case of the assessee itself, copies of the same are filed in the paper book. The authorities below have gone by the findings given against the assessee in the earlier years and confirmed the addition on this issue. Therefore, complete facts of the case were not examined and verified including the amount if any incurred by the assessee for business purpose out of the retention amount. However, after passing of the impugned orders, there is a change on the matter in issue and the points have now been decided in favour of the assessee which is also not disputed by the learned DR. However, the authorities below have no occasion to examine the facts of the case in the light of the above decisions cited by the learned Counse ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ses. 7. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the Court on Friday, the 10th day of April, 2015 at Ahmedabad. 6. Learned counsel for the assessee at the very outset agreed that this issue be set aside to the file of Assessing Officer for re-adjudicating the same in accordance with the issue taken up in earlier years. On the other ld. Departmental Representative did not raise any objection. 7. Though the tax effect involved in this appeal is below 3 lacs but considering the consistence of the issue involved in number of years, we deem it appropriate to adjudicate it on merit and therefore respectfully following the order of the Co-ordinate Bench, we set aside t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
