9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (5) TMI 162X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... come at Rs. 12. 82 crores. 2. First ground of appeal is about rectification proceedings carried out u/s. 154 of the Act. Against the order of the AO passed for the year under consideration, the assessee preferred an appeal before the First Appellate Authority (FAA). Giving effect to his order, dated 26/03/2010, the AO passed an order on 20/05/2010. The AO observed that there was mistake in his order of May 20th, 2010. Accordingly, a notice u/s. 154 was issued on 07/09/2011 proposing to rectify the mistake. As per the AO while giving effect to the order of the FAA, the returned income of Rs. 4. 39 crore was taken, that the said income included set off of losses of Rs. 1. 67 crores of the AY. 2003-04, that there were no losses of that AY. pe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he FAA referred the matter to the AO along with the paper book filed by the assessee containing 107 pages. The explanation of the assessing officer was forwarded to the assessee and final hearing of the case was fixed on 08/11/2012. As per the FAA, no counter reply of facts of the case, as mentioned by the AO, was filed before him. He held that there was no balance loss was left to be carried forward and to be set off in the year under consideration, that the AO had analysed the factual matters of the case, that the assessee was not able to refute the finding given by the AO, that rectification order was as per law, that there was no merit in the argument that notice u/s. 154 was not served, that it was evident from the rectification order ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /12/2008, that thereafter there were no proceedings in connection with the matter in the appeal before the F AA, that question of withdrawal of loss/ depreciation by the rectification of the order giving effect to the FAA would not arise, that the disputed brought forward losses depreciation related to AY. 2001-02 and 2002-03, that assessment order u/s. 143 (3) for the AY. 2003-04 was passed on 14/02/2006, that the CIT set aside the order on 31/03/2008, that the assessee filed an appeal against the revisionary order of the CIT, that the Tribunal, vide its order dated 29/10/2008, set aside the order of the CIT dated 31/03/2008 passed u/s. 263, that the appeal filed by the Department against the order of the Tribunal was dismissed by the Hon' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the revisionary proceedings, initiated by the CIT, u/s. 263 of the Act, were set aside. As a result, the claim made by the assessee for carry forward and set off of unobserved loss/ depreciation had to be allowed. Thus, the AO had wrongly held that no depreciation was available in the AY. 2003-04, that the unabsorbed loss/depreciation was being carried forward from the earlier years.
Considering the above, we are of the opinion that order passed by the FAA has to be reversed. Jurisdictional issue, raised by the assessee, stands decided in its favour. We have also discussed the merits of the case.
A result appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19th April, 2017. X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
