Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2014 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (8) TMI 864 - AT - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 – Held that:- In the absence of any earlier assessment by assessing officer u/s 143(3) it cannot be held that assessing officer exercised any opinion on the facts of the case as the return of the assessee was simply processed u/s 143(1) - the belief of the AO for reopening of the assessment is on the basis of new and independent information i.e. return and record and scrutiny assessment verification for the next year i.e. A.Y. 2007-08 –it could not be held that the reassessment is by way of change of opinion or there was no new material - the validity of reassessment proceedings is upheld – Decided against Assessee. Entitlement to loss on revaluation of the closing stock – Held that:- As per the proper method of accounting the assessee will always prepare separate list of items in respect of obsolete, non moving shortages, damaged goods, unserviceable inventories and thereafter a consolidation will be prepared - This is minimum, which could have been done by the assessee to justify its claim, in the absence of even minimum details of reduction in the value of stock, the assessee’s burden to justify the decrease, revaluation of the stock is not discharged - the claim of revaluation of stock was not subject to any accepted commercial accounting standard or practices but was left to the sole discretion of the management to claim it as and when it liked - a claim which is not substantiated by proper documentation cannot be allowed to the assessee – Decided against Assessee. Entitlement for deduction on previous year’s sale discount – Salary and rent disallowed u/s 40(a)(ia) - Held that:- The contention of the assessee is accepted that assessee has produced no evidence or convincing argument to come to a view that the liability for discount of earlier years sales crystallized in this year - In the absence of discharge of such a burden to prove crystallization of liability there was no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) - the law mandates the expenditure should be allowed in the year in which it is allowable in accordance with law subject to the prescribed payment – Decided against assessee. Imposition of penalty u/s 271(1)(c) – Held that:- The books of accounts which were rejected by the AO have been upheld to be proper by CIT(A), a finding which is not challenged by the revenue - any inference drawn by AO on the basis of falsehood or unreliability of the books of A/Cs has no significance in the penalty proceedings - every confirmation of quantum addition cannot result in imposition of concealment penalty - upholding of books of A/Cs of the assessee C.A having certified the damage of the goods by flood though with a rider that the claim will be made depending on the management decision - the damage in the flood cannot be rejected out rightly or held to be a false claim. Claim of discount on earlier year sale – Held that:- The assessee failed to demonstrate that the factum of actual crystallization of liability in this year, the disallowance has been sustained as pertains to earlier year - had the assessee claimed the amount in preceding year in all fairness it would have been allowed - The year of allowability may be a relevant factor in deciding the quantum appeal, but it cannot be a decisive factor to impose concealment penalty - when the assessee disclosed all the particulars along with the return of income - the relevant particulars were filed with the return, further information was given in assessment proceedings, assessee’s books of A/Cs have been upheld to be correct – following the decision in COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX Versus RELIANCE PETROPRODUCTS PVT. LTD. [2010 (3) TMI 80 - SUPREME COURT] - assessee have filed all the relevant details along with the return of income, the penalty imposed on the assessee is deleted – Decided in favour of Assessee.
|