9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (2) TMI 95X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s, the assessee had sold some apartments, for which it had disclosed the sale consideration, out of which the cost of the land was disclosed in the returns at 45% and consequently paid tax on the sale consideration minus the land cost. The assessing authority did not accept the land cost at 45%, but instead assessed it at 40% and assessed the tax. The assessee challenged the assessment order by filing the appeals, where it claimed the land cost to be 50% of the sale consideration, instead of 45% as had been claimed in the returns. 3. The appellate authority considered the matter on merits and, though on facts it came to the conclusion that the land cost was over 50%, but as the claim made in the returns filed by the assessee was for only 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d by the first appellate authority at 45% of the contract receipts, even after noticing the finding of the first appellate authority that land cost as per registered sale deeds and the certificate of the Chartered Accountant worked out to 54% of the contract receipts, merely for the reason that the same is not claimed in the returns filed? 6. The main issue to be decided by this Court is as to whether the petitioner can be granted benefit over and above that what has been claimed in the returns filed by the assessee for the relevant tax periods. Admittedly, the claim of the petitioner, in its returns filed for the relevant tax periods, was at 45% towards land cost. Though Assessing Officer allowed only 40%, the first appellate authority gr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ities and acted out of its jurisdiction to entertain a claim for deduction of input tax rebate in favour of the assessee by accepting some material, purporting it to be based on the books of accounts and the purchase invoices etc. and in granting reliefs to the assessee. We find, it is a case of the First Appellate Authority acting more loyal than the king, even though a claim had not been put forth by the assessee through the returns, the First Appellate Authority has ventured to allow the appeals and grant relief to the assessee, contrary to statutory provisions!" 8. Similar view has been taken by another Division Bench of this Court in the case of State of Karnataka vs. Centum Industries Private Limited, Bangalore, reported in 2014(80) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
