TMI Blog2014 (6) TMI 407X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eturn – Held that:- There was no delay on the part of the assessee in filing the return - assessee could not file the return for the block period as the department had taken time to supply the copies of the seized documents on the basis of which the assessee had filed the return for the block period on 25.2.1999 - There was no delay on the part of the assessee in filing the return after the supply of copies of the seized documents by the revenue - deletion of levy of interest by the Tribunal is justified – Decided against Revenue. - ITA No. 430 of 2005 - - - Dated:- 2-5-2014 - Ajay Kumar Mittal And Jaspal Singh,JJ. For the Appellant Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Advocate For the Respondent : Mr. J. S. Bhasin, Advocate ORDER ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... turn was filed by the respondent on 25.2.1999 declaring income of Rs. 31,42,090/-. Assessment under Section 158BC of the Act was completed at an undisclosed income of Rs. 6,46,52,570/- on 28.9.2000, Annexure A.1. Besides the other additions, addition of Rs. 26,24,280/- was also made on account of disallowances under Section 40A(3) of the Act. Addition of Rs.6,11,31,013/- was made by the Assessing Officer on account of suppressed profit. Interest under Section 158BFA(1) of the Act was also charged for late filing of return in response to notice under Section 158BC of the Act. Aggrieved by the order, the respondent filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [CIT(A)]. Vide order dated 30.3.2001, Annexure A.2, the CIT(A) partl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the same was covered against the revenue. A Division Bench judgment of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Smt.Santosh Jain, (2008) 296 ITR 324 had adjudicated the said question in favour of the assessee and against the revenue holding that where the income of the assessee has been computed by applying gross profit rate, there is no need to invoke the provisions of Section 40A(3) of the Act as the gross profit rate takes care of expenditure incurred otherwise than by way of cross cheques also. 5. Adverting to question No.(ii), the issue herein arises regarding chargeability of interest under section 158BFA(1) of the Act for late filing of return. As noticed by the Tribunal in its order dated 8.4.2005, Annexure A.4, the Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... held that the time taken for supplying the documents by the department to the assessee has to be excluded for purposes of determining the delay in filing the return and for charging of interest under section 158BFA(1) of the Act. The relevant observations read thus:- 10. On the other hand, the department also slept over the request of the assessee for furnishing the copies of the documents. It took more than one year in supplying the documents as the request was made on 1.10.1997 and documents were supplied on 20.11.1998. For this delay which is attributable to the department, the assessee cannot suffer and pay the interest. Thus, the approach of the Assessing Officer in directing the assessee to pay the interest for the entire period ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
