TMI Blog2013 (7) TMI 81X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... essee was Rs. 1,57,14,572/-. Even after the disallowance u/s 43B amounting to Rs. 14,14,057/-, the assessed loss is Rs. 1,43,00,515/-. That ordinarily, no assessee would try to increase the loss by making a wrong claim. Moreover, the assessee has already disclosed that the amount was payable. Thus, there was no concealment of any fact or furnishing of inaccurate particulars - appeal of the assessee allowed. - ITA No.5402/Del/2012 - - - Dated:- 14-6-2013 - Shri G. D. Agrawal And Shri Rajpal Yadav,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri K. Sampath and Shri V. Raja Kumar, Advocates. For the Respondent : Shri R. I. S. Gill, CIT-DR. ORDER Per G. D. Agrawal, VP. This appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of learned CIT( ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d had great expertise available with it, it was possible that even the assessee could make a "silly" mistake. The fact that the tax audit report was filed along with the return and that it unequivocally stated that the provision for payment was not allowable under section 40A(7) of the Act indicated that the assessee made a computation error in its return of income. The contents of the tax audit report suggested that there was no question of the assessee concealing its income or of the assessee furnishing any inaccurate particulars. Apart from the fact that the assessee did not notice the error, it was not even noticed even by the Assessing Officer who framed the assessment order. All that had happened was that through a bona fide and inadv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee had neither concealed the income nor filed inaccurate particulars thereof. In recording this finding, the Tribunal felt that if two views of the claim of the assessee were possible, the explanation offered by it could not be said to be false. This, however, is not the factual position in the case before us. The facts of the present case thus are clearly distinguishable. It is true that mere submitting a claim which is incorrect in law would not amount to giving inaccurate particulars of the income of the assessee, but it cannot be disputed that the claim made by the assessee needs to be bona fide. If the claim besides being incorrect in law is mala fide, Explanation 1 to section 271(1)(c) would come into play and work to the disadvanta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee before us did not explain either to the income-tax authorities or to the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal as to in what circumstances and on account of whose mistake, the amounts claimed as deductions in this case were not added, while computing the income of the assessee-company. We cannot lose sight of the fact that the assessee is a company which must be having professional assistance in computation of its income, and its accounts are compulsorily subjected to audit. In the absence of any details from the assessee, we fail to appreciate how such deductions could have been left out while computing the income of the assessee-company and how it could also have escaped the attention of the auditors of the company." 5. Thus, afte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
