9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 894X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons in the belated presentation of the present appeal. Accordingly, the delay is condoned and appeal is taken up for hearing for disposal on merits. 3. Briefly stated the facts of the case are that the original assessment in this case was completed u/s 143(3). Thereafter the CIT issued notice u/s 263 on following seven issues:- (i) Short term capital loss of Rs 5,525 wrongly set off against business income. (ii) Section 14A disallowance not made. (iii) Software expenses not disallowed. (iv) TDS and income reconciliation not done. (v) Valuation of closing stock not in conformity with section 145A of the Act. (vi) The conditions u/s 36(2) for allowability of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year as a separate unit which has to be considered for the purposes of section 263 for examining as to whether or not the assessment order is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. As the assessment order on this score , in itself, is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue, in our considered opinion, the learned CIT was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to revise the assessment order on this point. 7. Second issue is about not making of any disallowance u/s 14A. From the assessment order it can be seen that the Assessing Officer did not make any disallowance u/s 14A despite the fact that the assessee had earned exempt income. The learned CIT issued notice u/s 263 on this point. On the submiss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ome 'reasonable basis' under the circumstances which are prevailing before us. We, therefore, do not find any infirmity in the impugned order on this issue requiring interference. 10. Next issue on which the learned CIT revised the assessment order is about TDS and income reconciliation not done. The learned AR submitted that pursuant to restoration of matter by the learned CIT to the A.O., the Assessing Officer vide his order u/s 143(3) read with section 263 did not make any addition on this account. In view of the fact that the Assessing Officer, while giving effect to the order u/s 263, did not make any addition on this score, no grievance can be said to have been resulted to the assessee by reason of the restoration of this issue by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 33.24 lakh. The Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in CIT Vs. Mahalaxmi Glass Works Pvt. Ltd. [(2009) 318 ITR 116 (Bom.)] has held where in the closing stock unutilized Modvat credit is adjusted, similar adjustment should be made to the opening stock also. Similar view has been canvassed by the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Mahavir Alluminium [(2008) 297 ITR 77 (Del.)]. No where it has been held that despite the mandate of section 145A, the stock should be valued as per 'exclusive' method. Even the Mumbai bench of the Tribunal in the case of Hawkins Cookers Limited (supra) has also directed the Assessing Officer to give effect to section 145A by allowing appeal of the assessee for statistical purposes. Since the assessee valued its st ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
