Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2021 (8) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (8) TMI 844 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 40(a)(ia) - claim the benefit of the second proviso to Section 201 (1) - HELD THAT:- We find that proviso inserted u/s 201 (1) by the finance act 2012 with effect from 1 July 2012 has been held to be retrospective in operation by honourable Delhi High Court in on Ansal landmark township private limited [2015 (9) TMI 79 - DELHI HIGH COURT] as it is curative in nature. However to get the benefit of the above proviso certain particulars are required to be furnished before the AO in a particular manner. Though assessee has furnished certain information before AO however they were not in the prescribed format and not accompanied with the certificate of the accountant showing that income has been included by payees in return of income. So it was rejected. Learned AO further held that there was no claim made by the assessee by filing revised return and therefore in view of the decision of the honourable Supreme Court it cannot be entertained. We find that as the honourable Delhi High Court has held that the above proviso inserted u/s 201 (1) is retrospective in nature the assessee must be granted the benefit of the above proviso provided the assessee furnish the requisite information before the assessing officer in the prescribed manner. The information submitted by the assessee before the assessing officer, is not in the manner in which it is required. Before ld CIT – A also assessee did not file this information. Therefore, in interest of justice, there is no harm if assessee gets one more opportunity in time bound manner to furnish this information. Regarding not making claim by filing revised return, fetters laid down by the honourable Supreme Court in the decision of the Goetz [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT] do not apply to the first appellate authority. therefore, the claim of the assessee should have been entertained by the ld CIT (A). Disallowing the cost of material - whether the same was incurred "wholly and exclusively" for the purpose of the business.” - HELD THAT:- We find that if assessee would like to claim any expenditure as a deduction, it is the duty of the assessee to furnish the requisite information in a reasonable manner. Assessee cannot plead that as percentage of expenditure compared to income is very low, therefore, there is no need of submission of any details. We do not appreciate such an argument, it tantamount to bypass the authority and responsibility of ld AO to compute the correct income of assessee. Further, it can also not be said that if there is a revenue there has to be certain expenditure, which should necessarily be allowed without verification. In this case, assessee has not submitted any details except the annual accounts. Therefore, we do not find any infirmity in the orders of the lower authorities in confirming the above disallowance.
|