TMI Blog2017 (2) TMI 272X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion to compensatory afforestation as per the directions of the Supreme Court. It is not permissible for the assessee to make phase-wise payment. In that view, the order of the Appellate Tribunal is sound and proper. See Ramgad Minerals and Mining Pvt. Ld. [2012 (1) TMI 313 - Karnataka High Court] Interest u/s 234C - Held that:- Direct the A.O. to levy interest u/s 234C only on the basis of returned income of the assessee. - ITA No.1447/Mum/2012, ITA No.1412/Mum/2014 - - - Dated:- 3-2-2017 - Shri Rajendra, A.M. and Shri Pawan Singh,J.M. For The Revenue : Shri Santanu K. Saikia-CIT-DR For The Assessee : Shri Dinesh Vyas Per Rajendra, AM: Challenging the order, dated 16.12.2011,passed u/s.263 of the CIT-2 and the ord ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ITA/1447/Mum/2012(06-07) 2. Vide his notice u/s.263 the CIT-2 Mumbai, informed the assessee as under :- During the relevant assessment year the company had contributed ₹ 212.52 crores towards fund and capitalised in the books of account under the head Development of property , but in computing taxable income claimed such contribution as business expenditure u/s. 37(1) of the Income tax Act, 1961. Since the contribution is for mining lease rights, same should have been disallowed as capital expenditure. It is seen from records that ₹ 47,49,82,836/- on account of prior period expenses are not admissible expenditure as the company is following mercantile system of accounting for income. Expenditure is required t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nnot be ruled out that in case detailed scrutiny as above had been done and all the relevant facts collected, the result would have been different. It is now judicially accepted fact that the lack of scrutiny in framing an order renders the same as erroneous. Since the likely errors as pointed out above have huge tax implications,therefore, it is clearly a case where the assessment framed is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. Finally, he set aside the order passed by AO and directed the AO to fram a fresh assessment order with regard to above mentioned three issues. 3. During the course of hearing before us, the Authorised Representative (AR) stated that in the covering letter to the return of income the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CIT had invoked the provisions of section 263 of the Act with regard to three issues, that after due verification the AO had dropped two issues out of the three and had passed order about the first issue i.e contribution to CAF.We further find that identical issue was decided in favour of the assessee in various Benches of the Tribunal . In case of the sister concerns, the Tribunal had decided the issue in their favour. We would like to refer to the case of Ramgad Minerals and Mining Pvt. Ld. (supra) and it reads as under: 3. The Commissioner of income tax vide order at Annexure-B confirmed the ordr of the Assessing Authority. The appellate Tribunal vide annexure-a has made the following observation . We find force in the subm ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... um/14: 5. As stated earlier, the appeal is against the order of CIT(A)-6. First Ground of appeal is about contribution towards Govt. of India s CAF.In the earlier para of our order we have discussed the issue at length and have decided it favour if the assessee. Following the same, Ground No.1 is decided in favour of the assessee. 6. Before us, The AR stated that Ground No.2 was consequential in nature and Ground No.4 had become infructuous, in view of the rectification order, hence, both the grounds are not being adjudicated. 7. Ground No.3 pertains to interest charged u/s. 234C of the Act. While computing the income of the assessee, the AO charged interest as per provisions of section 234 C, with reference to shortfall i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
