Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (7) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 198 - AT - Income TaxRectification of mistake - difference between the gross receipts as per the TDS certificate and turnover as per the Profit & Loss Account - Held that:- No information could be furnished as to whether the assessee’s application under S.154 was forwarded to the concerned Assessing Officer, and if so, the date of forwarding of the same. Since the application is filed on 26.8.2013, we reasonably presume that it is forwarded within a period of 15 days, and at any rate, before the end of that year. Till date, no action was taken by the Assessing Officer, which implies that the Assessing Officer has not passed any order, and therefore, it is deemed to have been accepted. At any rate, this information was already filed before the Assessing Officer and it was in the knowledge of the CIT(A) in the first round of litigation and also before the Tribunal, which had taken cognisance of the petition filed under S.154, to set aside the matter for reconsideration. Assessing Officer could have verified the status of the petition filed under S.154. This is a normal practice that when an appeal is filed before the CIT(A), a copy of the appeal papers is sent to the Assessing Officer and it is the duty of the Assessing Officer to send his note on the appeal filed by the assessee, so as to assist the first appellate authority in coming to appropriate conclusion. The Assessing Officer has neither acted upon the petition filed under S.154 nor objected to the material filed alongwith the petition filed under S.154 of the Act. In fact, during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee furnished the details of earlier two years to submit that the gross receipts as per the TDS Certificates cannot be taken as the basis for working out the turnover of a particular year. The Assessing Officer has not commented upon the same. Having regard to the overall circumstances of the case, we are of the view that the learned CIT(A) was justified in taking cognisance of the material and upon verification, he has correctly taken a view that the advances received cannot be taken as part of the current year’s turnover. The details available on record are not doubted even at this stage by the Revenue. Under these circumstances, it is not necessary for the CIT(A) to give detailed reasons, when he, upon verification of the details, notices that the figures are reconcilable. Under these circumstances, we uphold the order of the learned CIT(A) - Decided against revenue
|