TMI Blog2015 (2) TMI 771X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e remanded back to the Assessing Officer to verify and pass appropriate orders. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes. Addition made in respect of deposits in the current account in the Indian Overseas Bank - Tribunal restored the addition as the said income had not been offered as income in the original return as well as in the revised return - Held that:- addition of ₹ 7,44,340/-, as has been clearly recorded by the Assessing Officer that this amount does not reflect as a trading receipt, but only as unexplained deposit coupled with the statement of Directors in the presence of Chartered Accountant that it was not offered as income of the said year, the Tribunal was justified in upholding the order of the Assessing Officer. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not correct in ordering remand for considering the issue, since it was neither canvassed by the assessee nor was the issue before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). - Decided in favour of the Revenue. - Tax Case (Appeal) No. 582 of 2007 - - - Dated:- 10-2-2015 - R. Sudhakar And R. Karuppiah,JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. C. V. Rajan For the Respondent : Mr. T. R. Senthil ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... materials placed before this Court. 5. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessment in this case relates to the assessment year 1996-97. The appellant/assessee is a public limited company dealing in medical equipments. It is a joint venture company with Electronics Corporation of Tamil Nadu Limited ( in short, ELCOT) holding shares in the appellant company. The assessee filed return of income on 22.10.1996 declaring total income of ₹ 30,50,272/-. The assessee also filed revised return of income on 12.1.1999 declaring income of ₹ 34,95,540/-. The Assessing Officer completed the assessment and made the following three additions: i) Income of Electro Medical Maintenance Centre - ₹ 4,61,642/-; ii) Service Charges - ₹ 24,08,748/- and iii) Bank deposit in current account - ₹ 7,44,340/-. 6. While completing the assessment, with regard to the addition made under the head 'income of Electro Medical Maintenance Centre', the Assessing Officer found that after adjustment of service charges and expenses incurred, the net income comes to ₹ 4,61,642/-, which has not been included in the books of accounts. Before the As ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ascertaining the quantum of expenditure, the actual income could be determined. It was stated that the assessee had offered this amount as income for the assessment year 1998-99. After considering the submissions made by the assessee, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the addition of ₹ 4,61,642/- holding that the profit from the project could be ascertained correctly and finally only on conclusion/completion of the project. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) directed the Assessing Officer to ensure that the entire income arising out of the project is brought to tax appropriately. 10. With regard to the advances received from the customers at ₹ 24,08,748/- representing service charges, the assessee contended before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) that from the date of installation/commissioning the customers are entitled to one year warranty period and hence, the income could not be correctly ascertained from the advances unless the expenses are properly taken into account. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) accepted the contention of the assessee and deleted the addition of ₹ 24,08,748/- and directed the Assessing Officer to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ee is before this Court. 17. It is seen from the order of the Tribunal that the Assessing Officer had made three additions to the income of the assessee, which was confirmed by the Tribunal. On the first issue, namely, addition of ₹ 4,61,642/-, the Tribunal upheld the order of the Assessing Officer primarily on the plea that the Authorised Representative of the assessee had agreed for the inclusion of income and therefore, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was not correct in deleting the addition. 18. On the next issue relating to service charges of ₹ 24,08,748/-, the assessee claimed that they have received this amount from three customers representing service charges. Their plea was that the warranty condition was not terminated and therefore, it cannot be offered as income for that year and the Assessing Officer, however, took the view that on installation and commission of the equipment, service charges become due and has to be therefore brought to income for the assessment year 1996-97. On appeal by the assessee, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) deleted the addition. The Tribunal reversed the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) on ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
