Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2010 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2010 (5) TMI 54 - HC - Income TaxBook profit - Minimum alternate tax - MAT - power of the commissioner to revise assessment u/s 263 - The provisions of Section 263 had been invoked by the Commissioner on the ground that the assessment order was erroneous and was prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. According to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), while calculating the book profits under Section 115JB of the said Act, sales commission of Rs 241.90 lacs claimed in the profit and loss account was not added back, even though this claim had been disallowed in calculating the total income under the normal provisions of the Act. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was of the opinion that the mistake had resulted in under assessment of income under Section 115JB to the said extent. It was also observed by the said Commissioner that the assessment was made by the Assessing Officer without an adequate enquiry or investigation. Held that: that insofar as the computation of income under Section 115JB is concerned, the powers of the Assessing Officer are very limited. This is clear from the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd v. CIT: (2008 -TMI - 6081 - SUPREME Court) which, though it related to Section 115J, would be equally applicable to computation under Section 115JB - Once the profit and loss account was audited and duly certified by the statutory auditors to be in accordance with the Companies Act, 1956, it was not open to the Assessing Officer to go beyond the profits so declared except to the extent of making increases or decreases as per the Explanation to the said Section. It is not the case of the revenue that the Assessing Officer or the Commissioner of Income Tax was purporting to make any adjustments as provided under the Explanation. Consequently, the Tribunal was absolutely right in concluding that the provisions of Section 263 of the said Act could not be attracted because there was nothing erroneous in the original order passed by the Assessing Officer
|