TMI Blog2010 (5) TMI 66X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he value of the shares was overstated in the balance sheet by Rs 69,78,707/- and the Assessing Officer required the assessee to indicate as to why the said amount should not be added to the returned income. Thereafter, in the order passed under Section 154/143(1)(a) of the said Act, the Assessing Officer made the aforesaid addition which was confirmed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). ITAT deleted the additions. Held that: We agree with the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal that this was a matter which could not have been adjusted under Section 143(1)(a) and certainly not a matter which could have been rectified under Section 154 of the said Act. We also note that the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... shares sold was Rs 1,10,57,400/- and this figure was used for the purposes of computing capital gains under Section 48 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as "the said Act"). However, in the books of accounts, the assessee company followed Accounting Standard-13 and took the average cost of Rs 40,78,693/- as the cost price of these shares. The Assessing Officer issued a notice under Section 154 proposing to rectify the purported mistake in the intimation issued under Section 143(1)(a) of the said Act. The so-called mistake, which was sought to be rectified, was that as per the balance sheet, the value of the shares was shown at Rs 40,78,693/- whereas the cost price of the shares of RLL was taken at Rs 1,10,57,400/- for the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he A.O. proposed to make any addition on account of value of shares as per in the balance sheet, the A. O. should have issued a notice to the assessee giving him an opportunity to have its say and then to decide the matter in accordance with the provisions of law contained in that behalf instead of making the addition by way of rectification order made u/S 154 of the Act rectifying the intimation issued u/S 143(1)(a) of the Act." 4. We agree with the conclusions arrived at by the Tribunal that this was a matter which could not have been adjusted under Section 143(1)(a) and certainly not a matter which could have been rectified under Section 154 of the said Act. We also note that the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Incom ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
