9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (10) TMI 867X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for disallowance of MSME interest and prior period expenses in Part-A of return of income, the assessee has wrongly included the same in Column (i) which is meant for disallowance of contingent liability. Since the mistake is apparent on record we are inclined to allow the claim of the assessee. Otherwise it will amount to double disallowance. Accordingly, grounds raised by the assessee are allowed. - Shri S. Rifaur Rahman, Accountant Member And Shri Sudhir Pareek, Judicial Member For the Assessee : Shri Pankaj Sharma, CA For the Revenue : Shir Vivek K. Upadhyay, Sr. DR. ORDER PER S. RIFAUR RAHMAN, AM : 1. This appeal is filed by the assessee against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)/National Faceless Appeal Centr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 66,800/- towards contingent liability. Therefore, he rejected the submission of the assessee that the amount of Rs. 3,82,508/- is added back with the observation that the assessee disallowed the same clearly mentioning it as contingent liability. 3. Aggrieved with the above order, assessee is in appeal before us raising following grounds of appeal:- 01. That the ld. CIT(A) has erred in disallowing an amount of Rs. 3,82,508/- on account of interest to micro small and medium enterprises development act, 2006 without considering the fact that it has already been added back in the computation of income of the assessee and taxes on that already been paid. 02. That the order of the CIT(A) is totally bad in the eyes of law and is against natural j ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng Officer has corrected an amount of Rs. 23,77,197/- and retained the other disallowances made u/s 143(1) which includes Rs. 3,82,508/- which is a disputed issue before us. He prayed that the assessee has no doubt disallowed the abovesaid amount and the same was clubbed in the wrong head, it does not mean that assessee has made a wrong claim. He prayed that this amounts to double disallowance. 5. On the other hand, ld. DR for the Revenue brought to our notice page 38 of the paper book which is again rectification order passed u/s 154 and relied on the findings of the ld. CIT (A). 6. Considered the rival submissions and material placed on record. We observed from the record that assessee has declared net profit as per profit loss account of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
