TMI Blog2013 (9) TMI 1057X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... counsel for the respondent is taken on record. We clarify that in case this difference has arisen on account of change of method of calculation of depreciation, the assessing officer will not touch and go into any other aspect. This answers question No.(i) which has to be answered against the revenue and in favour of the respondent assessee Addition being expenditure incurred on rural development programmes treating them as advertisement and publicity expenses - Held that:- In the absence of full facts and failure of the appellant to place relevant orders on record, we cannot answer the question and the same is left unanswered for want of details and proper prosecution. Debenture issue expenses on issue of convertible debentures - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rovisions but as the total income was less than 30% of its book profits, taxable income was computed and declared under Section 115J at ₹ 1,07,45,880/-, which was 30% of the book profits. 3. The assessing officer noted that the assessee in the book profits had re-computed depreciation in the balance sheet as per Part II and III of Schedule VI of the Companies Act. With regard to the plant at Okhla it had changed the method of computing depreciation from Straight Line Method to Written Down Value method. As a result the depreciation of ₹ 126.18 lacs which was the balancing figure in view of the change of method was introduced in the books of accounts, reducing the books profits. The assessing officer held that this should no ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mpugned order has affirmed the findings recorded by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Reference has been made to several judgments of the Tribunal affirming and taking the said view. They relied upon the decision of the Supreme Court in Tuticorin Alkali Chemicals And Fertilizers Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax ; [1997] 227 ITR 172 (Del.). 6. The issue raised before us is covered by the decision of the Supreme court in Apollo Tyres Ltd. V. Commissioner of Income Tax [2002] 255 ITR 273, wherein it has been held as under: Therefore, we are of the opinion, the Assessing Officer while computing the income under section 115J has only the power of examining whether the books of account are certified by the authorities under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on 115J of the Income-tax Act, the Assessing Officer has only power to examine whether the books of account were certified by the authorities under the Companies Act as having been properly maintained in accordance with the Companies Act. It is further held that the Assessing Officer thereafter has limited powers of making increases and reductions as provided for in the Explanation to the said section. The apex court further held that the Assessing Officer does not have the jurisdiction to go beyond the net profits shown in the profit and loss account, except to the extent provided in the Explanation to Section 115J of the Income-tax Act. In the instant case, the accounts maintained by the assessee are certified by the auditors. Under the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... This answers question No.(i) which has to be answered against the revenue and in favour of the respondent assessee, subject to what has been stated by the counsel for the respondent and the direction made above. Question No.(ii) 9. With regard to question No.(ii), we are not unable to answer the same, as relevant facts are not on record. The order passed by the assessing officer is cryptic and lacking in details. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Tribunal have relied upon earlier orders to decide the issue in favour of the respondent-assessee. There is no factual assertion or details which enables us to decipher facts as found and apply any principle of law. 10. During the course of hearing before us, learned co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the ground that it was not relating to business. 13. If the facts stated by the respondent are correct, the appeal filed on the second question was completely uncalled for. Even the amount involved is miniscule. However in the absence of full facts and failure of the appellant to place relevant orders on record, we cannot answer the question and the same is left unanswered for want of details and proper prosecution. Question No.(iii) 14. The third question referred to above is covered by the judgment of the Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Havells India Limited; [2013] 352 ITR 376 (Del). In this decision, India Cements Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax; [1966] 60 ITR 52 (SC) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Secure Meters Ltd. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
