Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2024 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2024 (2) TMI 1235 - AT - Income TaxEnhanced loss not claimed through revised return of income - Increase in computation of capital loss, claimed at assessment stage only by way of filing a letter instead of revised return of income - HELD THAT:- Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Abhinitha Foundation Pvt. Ltd.,[2017 (6) TMI 604 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] has finally considered and held that, what emerges from a perusal of the ratio of the judgments cited above, in particular, the judgments rendered by the Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. [2006 (3) TMI 75 - SUPREME COURT], and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd.'s [1996 (12) TMI 7 - SUPREME COURT] case, and those, rendered in Ramco Cements Ltd. [2008 (12) TMI 413 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT] and CIT vs Malind Laboratories P. Ltd. [2014 (12) TMI 975 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] as also the judgments of Sam Global Securities Ltd.'s case [2013 (9) TMI 876 - DELHI HIGH COURT] and Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd.'s case [2008 (4) TMI 3 - DELHI HIGH COURT] that, even if, the claim made by the assessee company does not form part of the original return or even the revised return, it could still be considered, if, the relevant material was available on record, either by the appellate authorities, (which includes both the CIT (A) and the Tribunal) by themselves, or on remand, by the AO. In the instant case, the Tribunal, on perusal of the record, found that the relevant material qua the claim made by the assessee company u/s 80 IB (10) of the Act was placed on record by the assessee company during the assessment proceedings and therefore, it deemed it fit to direct its re-examination by the Assessing Officer. We uphold the order of CIT(A) and dismiss this appeal of Revenue. Validity of Reopening of assessment - notice beyond period of four years - CIT(A) quashing the reassessment proceedings as there was no omission on the part of the assessee to disclose any material fact necessary relating to the assessment of this assessment year during the original assessment proceedings completed u/s. 143(3) of the Act and assessee’s case was reopened after expiry of 4 years - HELD THAT:- AO has recorded the reason from verification of balance sheet and the profit declared from the profit & loss account, which was subject matter of original assessment proceedings u/s. 143(3) of the Act. From the reason, it is not coming out that what is the failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly the material facts relating to this assessment year for assessment of the assessee’s income, which has escaped assessment. From the reasons recorded in the present case, we could not comprehend what is the failure of the assessee, as there is no mention by the AO in the reasons recorded of any failure of the assessee to disclose fully and truly all material facts for framing of assessment for the relevant assessment year of escaped income. Once this is the position, we are of the view that the assessee’s case is fully covered by the proviso to section 147 of the Act and the decision of Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Foarmer France [2003 (1) TMI 101 - SC ORDER] squarely applies - Decided against revenue. Addition of business income being advance and deposits written off - CIT(A) deleted addition accepting additional evidences - HELD THAT:- Firstly, this information is available before the AO there cannot be any violation of Rule 46A of the Rules. Secondly, it is a fact that this Rs. 2 crores received on account of capital receipt and it cannot be treated as business asset because the amount was received in connection with sale of hotel assets but inadvertently declared by assessee as business income. Since, such amount represents sale consideration against sale of capital asset, it should be adjusted against capital work in progress and it cannot be held as business income. The CIT(A) has rightly deleted the addition. Hence, we confirm the order of CIT(A) and accordingly, the appeal of Revenue is dismissed.
|