TMI Blog2017 (8) TMI 184X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to the Assessing Officer. It was further noticed that the amount of sundry balances written off had already been added back in the computation of income of Baddi Unit of the assessee company on which deduction under Section 80IC of the Act had been claimed. The assessee explained that due to inadvertent mistake, the same was omitted to be added back in the computation of its income. Thus, the Tribunal concurred with the findings recorded by the CIT(A) and dismissed the appeal filed by the revenue. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No. 263 of 2017 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 21-7-2017 - MR. AJAY KUMAR MITTAL AND MR. AMIT RAWAL, JJ. For The Appellant/Revenue : Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing counsel ORDER Ajay Kumar Mittal, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... show cause as to why sundry balances written off amounting to ₹ 96,45,276/- be not added back to the taxable income of the assessee. In its reply dated 11.10.2010, the assessee stated that due to inadvertence, the amount was omitted to be added back in the computation of the income. The assessee also requested the Assessing Officer to add back the amount of ₹ 96,45,276/- in the computation of income. It was observed by the Assessing Officer that the assessee was attributing the error to an inadvertent mistake whereas it was a deliberate attempt to evade the tax corresponding to the said income by not showing it to be a part of the total taxable income. Therefore, the Assessing Officer, while adding back the amount of ₹ 96, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ces clearly suggested that it was not intentional mistake because assessee s company is of higher income group and is generally selected for scrutiny assessment. Reliance was placed on the judgment of the Apex Court in Price Waterhouse Coopers Pvt. Ltd Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 348 ITR 306, wherein it was held that the imposition of penalty on the assessee was not justified since the assessee had committed inadvertent bonafide error and it was not intended to or attempted to either conceal its income or furnish inaccurate particulars. Further, it has been recorded by the Tribunal after examining the entire evidence on record that the assessee on realizing the mistake that sundry debtors written off had not been added in the co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... otal income, submitted before Assessing Officer to make the addition of the same amount in the computation of income of the assessee for the year under consideration. The assessee has, thus, offered explanation to the same issue. The above facts proved that explanation of the assessee was bonafide and all the facts relating to the same and material to the computation of total income have been disclosed by the assessee. The Ld. CIT(Appeals), therefore, rightly noted that the circumstances clearly suggest that it was not intentional mistake because assessee s company is of higher income group and generally selected for scrutiny assessment. Therefore, there was no reason to believe that assessee would evade the taxes. This is a mistake in not ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
