9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 104X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shed all the materials for completing the assessment on 17.12.2019 u/s 143(3) of the Act. In fact in response to the notice dated 30.11.2019 issued under Section 142(1) of the Act. These information s were furnished by the petitioner by a detailed note on 09.12.2019. Therefore, it is clear that the reasons given for reopening the assessment is inspired from change of opinion by the AO. Therefore, there is no merits in the Impugned Notice and the Impugned Order for the Assessment Year 2017-2018. These writ petitions deserve to be allowed and are therefore accordingly allowed. - Honourable Mr. Justice C. Saravanan For the Petitioner (In both W.Ps) : Mr. Vikram Vijayaraghavan for M/s. Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan Ramamani For the Respondents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed Rs. 1,33,21,458/- towards advance written off as the expenditure claimed is not an allowable expenditure. 8. It is further submitted that this is impermissible and is contrary to the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., (2010) 320 ITR 561 SC which affirms the decision of the Full Bench of the Delhi High Court in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Kelvinator of India Ltd., (2002) 256 ITR 001 (Del.). 9. That apart, the learned counsel for the petitioner would submit that almost an identical issue came up before the Division Bench of the Bombay High Court in ICICI Securities Limited Vs. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax 3(2), Mumbai in W.P.No.1919 of 2006 and that the writ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... itions are liable to be dismissed. 13. That apart, the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents would place reliance on Explanation 1 to Section 147 of the Act, stood prior to 01.04.2021. As per which, it is submitted that, a mere production before the Assessing Officer of the account books or other evidence from which material evidence could with due diligence have been discovered by the Assessing Officer will not necessarily amount to disclosure within the meaning of proviso to Section 147 of the Act. 14. I have considered the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondents. 15. The records reveal that the petitioner had furnished all the materials for com ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng details: 1. Other Expenses: Bad debts - 1.33.21.458/-, whether offered to income in earlier year. Advance written off - 48,87,440/- Provide details. Note: Nature of advance - party wise breakup. Purchase of software 43,83,322/-. Note: Copies of invoices ( 10 lakhs), Nature of each softwares. 2. Note 39: Travelling (foreign Currency) 1,60,96,806/-. 10 lakhs. Name - relationship with company, amount, nature of business transaction don. 3. From statement of income. income considered separately 4,33,99,699/- what is the nature of income? 4. Form 3CD: 3 4 a.2. Payment to contractors - 1,24,63,661 ( 10 lakhs.). Name, PAN, address, amount, nature of work completed. 3 4.a.3. Fee for technical service 1,15.96,560 ( 10 lakhs.). Name, PAN, address, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
