9911796707
TMI Blog2017 (11) TMI 1560X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... IT(A)"), whereunder the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dismissed the appeal in respect of both the technical grounds and on the merits. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the original return of income of the assessee was completed under section 143(3) of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter for short called as "the Act") by order dated March 8, 2006 at a total income of Rs. 834,33,29,518 and book profits at Rs. 13,91,17,07,421. Thereafter the case was reopened vide notice under section 148 dated February 26, 2010 in respect of two grounds namely provision of doubtful debts to be disallowed being unascertained liability and disallowance of set off of prior period income against prior period expenditure. However, during the course of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on back of the amount relating to the prior period expenses, profit and loss account showing the prior period adjustment, schedule S showing the adjustment of the account of rates and taxes relating to the prior period were already available before the Assessing Officer and basing on this record alone and without any fresh tangible material or information the Assessing Officer reopened the matter. She further submitted that merely because the Assessing Officer does not put any specific query in respect of prior period expenditure adjustment with reference to schedule S, the same cannot be worked out against the assessee to reopen the concluded assessment. Reliance is placed on the decisions reported in CIT v. Kelvinator of India Ltd. [2010] ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /2011 [2016] 46 ITR (Trib) 162 (Mumbai), Deputy CIT v. Airports Authority of India (ITA No. 3841/Delhi/2011 dated March 16, 2012) and I. T. A. No. 3074/Delhi/2010 for the assessment year 2006-07 dated October 12, 2012 and I. T. A. No.1807/Delhi/2012 for the assessment year 2008-09 dated June 22, 2012, the tax authorities are not justified in disallowing the entire amount of prior period expenses while assessing the entire amount of prior period income, without bringing support of any of the provisions of the Act and assessment of the prior period income by disallowing the prior period expenses is bad under law. 5. Viewing from any angle, we are of the considered opinion that the Assessing Officer is not justified in reopening the matter wi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
