TMI Blog2015 (6) TMI 847X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... OURT OF INDIA ] and in the case of CIT vs. Foramer France (2003 (1) TMI 101 - SUPREME Court) and Sita World Travels (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (2004 (5) TMI 23 - DELHI High Court ) - Decided in favour of assessee. - I.T.A.No.4134/Del/2010, I.T.A.No.4135/Del/2010 - - - Dated:- 17-2-2015 - Shri H.S. Sidhu And Shri J.S. Reddy For the Appellant : Sh. BRR Kumar, Sr. DR For the Respondent : S h. D.C. Garg, CA ORDER Per H.S. Sidhu : JM These Appeals have been filed by the Revenue against the impugned orders both dated 02/06/2010 passed by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-X, New Delhi. Since the legal issue is common and identical, therefore, we are disposing of these Appeals by this consolidated order for the s ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ding. The Original assessment in this case was completed under section 143(3) of Income-tax Act vide order dated 28.03.2005 at NIL income after adjustment of depreciation for current year at ₹ 23,77,27,956/-. Balance depreciation remained unabsorbed amounting to ₹ 5,68,51,301/- was allowed to carry forward for subsequent year. Subsequently vide order dated 18.08.2008 u/s 154 of Income-tax Act, depreciation allowable was calculated at ₹ 23,94,35,051/-. After adjustment of depreciation of current year balance depreciation of ₹ 5,51,44,206/- was allowed to carry forward for subsequent year. The Assessing Officer perused the assessment record and observed that the Assessee Company has claimed excess amount under the foll ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ng the reasons to believe in writing and after approval from the Ld. CIT(A), Delhi-III, New Delhi u/s. 151(1) of the I.T. Act, the then AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act, 1961 on 25.3.2009. The reasons recorded were provided to the assessee vide letter dated 17.8.2008. In response to the same, the assessee provided letter dated 4.9.2009, as submitted that no income has escaped assessment and therefore, the assessee requested to drop the reassessment proceedings. The objections of the assessee was also considered and rejected by the AO, vide order dated 7.10.2009 before issuing the notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act and case of the assessee was fixed for hearing on 16.10.2009. On 16.10.2009 various Authorised Representative of the Asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... leted under section 143(3) of Income-tax Act vide order dated 28.03.2005 at NIL income after adjustment of depreciation for current year at ₹ 23,77,27,956/-. Balance depreciation remained unabsorbed amounting to ₹ 5,68,51,301/- was allowed to carry forward for subsequent year. Subsequently vide order dated 18.08.2008 u/s 154 of Income-tax Act, depreciation allowable was calculated at ₹ 23,94,35,051/-. After adjustment of depreciation of current year balance depreciation of ₹ 5,51,44,206/- was allowed to carry forward for subsequent year. AO perused the original assessment and observed that the assessee company has claimed excess amount under the following heads:- 1. As per schedule-9, page-16 of the audit report, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he assessee. In response to the same, assessee filed objection, which was considered and rejected vide order dated 7.10.2009. Thereafter, AO issued notice u/s. 148 of the I.T. Act on 25.3.2009. In response to the same, Authorised Representative of the assessee appeared and after hearing him, the AO completed the assessment on 29.10.2009 u/s. 143(3) by making the various additions. 9.2 As per the impugned order, Ld. CIT(A) has stated that the assessee vide his letter dated 4.9.2009 raised certain objections against reopening of the assessment which was disposed of by the AO on 7.10.2009, which Ld. CIT(A) has reproduced at pages 3 and 4 of the impugned order. The assessee has made additional grounds including the legal ground before the Ld ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 6) and the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sita World Travels (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (274 ITR 186). 9.5 In view of the aforesaid facts and circumstances, as explained above, we are of the view that the Ld. CIT(A) has passed a well reasoned order in the case of both the aforesaid assesses on the basis of the material available before him as well as on the basis of the decisions of the Hon ble Supreme Court of India in the case of CIT vs. Kelvinator of India Limited in Appeal Nos. 2009-2011 of 2003 and in the case of CIT vs. Foramer France (264 ITR 566) and the decision of the Hon ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Sita World Travels (India) Ltd. vs. CIT (274 ITR 186) and rightly held that the issue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
