Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2012 (6) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (6) TMI 184 - ITAT PUNEManner of determination of capital gain on sale of land and building - scope of the term 'May' - assessee contested that Revenue adopted the Stamp duty value of land and building as The total sale consideration without referring the matter to the Valuation Officer – Held that:- In terms of Sec 50C(2)(a) where an assessee claims before the AO that the value adopted or assessed by the Stamp valuation authority under sub-section (1) exceeds the fair market value of the property as on the date of transfer, then the Assessing Officer may refer valuation of the capital asset to the Valuation Officer - it is evident that the assessee had claimed in the return of income itself that the value adopted by the Stamp valuation authority exceeded the fair market value as on the date of transfer as provided in section 50C(2)(a) of the Act - notwithstanding the presence of the expression "may" in section 50C(2)(a), Assessing Officer ought to have referred the matter to the Valuation Officer instead of straightaway deeming the value adopted by the Stamp valuation authority as the full value of consideration – in favour of assessee. Provision for leave encashment – ITA held that the provision for leave encashment of could not be reduced from "book profits" while computing tax liability under section 115JB as while preparing such Profit & Loss account, the assessee company did not enter such amount in it and instead, the same formed a part of the Notes forming part of the accounts annexed to its annual accounts – Held that:- On a conjoint reading of sub-sections (2),(3A) of section 211 and Part II of Schedule VI to the Companies Act, 1956 and the Accounting Standard 15 once it is clear that the information towards incremental liability of leave encashment which has not been provided in the Profit & Loss account is otherwise disclosed in the Notes to the accounts, it would clearly fall within the ambit of Explanation 1 to the second Proviso to section 115JB of the Act which defines "book profits" to mean "net profit" as "shown" in the Profit & Loss account for the relevant previous year prepared under sub-section (2) of section 115JB - in favour of assessee. Charging of interest under sections 234B and 234C - the appellant contested that the total income was computed under section 115JB of the Act and in such a situation interest under sections 234B and 234C are not leviable – Held that:- As decided in Jt. CIT v Rolta India Ltd[2011 (1) TMI 5 (SC) ]held that Interest under Sections 234B and 234C shall be payable on failure to pay advance tax in respect of tax payable under Section 115JA/115JB – against assessee. Deletion of the addition of bad debts – Held that:- as assessee explained that the amount in question represented cost of corrugated boxes charged by the assessee to client to whom certain goods were sold and he did not receive this amount from the said concern, the same was claimed as bad debt in the current year - since the cost of boxes as charged to client constituted a part of income of the assessee company for financial year 2000-01, the condition for claiming bad debt had been fulfilled - the reason cited by the Assessing Officer for making the disallowance that the amount was in the nature of reimbursement which had not been included in the income of the assessee for any previous year, was not factually correct – against revenue.
|