Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2009 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2009 (5) TMI 842 - AT - Income TaxAdditional claim for clerical/ arithmetical error occurred in the return filed by the assessee - deduction for bad debts - business of manufacturing and marketing of bulk drugs formulations - AO initially processed the return u/s 143(1) and thereafter completed the assessment u/s 143(3) - AO rejected the claim - CIT(A) also rejected the claim of the assessee relying on the Supreme Court's decision in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. v. CIT [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] by observing that the assessee had to file a separate revised return of income to make such a claim - assessee not only made the claim for allowance of additional amount but has also an application under rule 29 for admission of additional evidence. During the course of assessment proceedings on July 10, 2006, submitted that the correct claim and the wrong claim was due to the fact that the figure was taken net of the provisions - an amount has been used against the provision for bad debts made during the financial year 2001-02 and been written back - said provision has been reversed on account of which the bad debt figure has come down but whereas, the correct figure of bad debt claimed. HELD THAT:- We hold that the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze (India) Ltd. makes it clear that the powers of the Tribunal as laid down in the case of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1996 (12) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] are not affected by this decision. Thus, the Tribunal has the power to admit an additional ground or claim made by the assessee, when all the facts are on record. In this case, the facts have been brought on record before AO by the assessee in the letter itself. Thus, as the facts are on record, we admit this claim of the assessee made before us by applying the ratio of the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT as well as case of Jute Corporation of India Ltd. v. CIT.[1990 (9) TMI 6 - SUPREME COURT].Thus, alternative argument of the assessee is allowed. As neither AO nor CIT(A), had considered the issue on the merits, we set aside the issue to the files of AO for fresh adjudication. AO shall consider the additional claim of the assessee for deduction of bad debts which has been admitted by us and dispose of the same denovo after giving reasonable adequate opportunity. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
|