TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... efund of any amount due to the assessee consequent to the assessment and therefore, the Assessing Officer is statutorily empowered to determine the revised income which can be lower than the returned income. Therefore, the objection raised by the Revenue to the impugned order of CIT(A) is untenable in the eyes of the law, as it stood for the period under consideration. - Decided against revenue - ITA Nos.288 to 291/PN/2014 - - - Dated:- 29-1-2015 - Shri G.S. Pannu, Accountant Member And Ms Sushma Chowla, Judicial Member For the Assessee : S/Shri Kirit Kamdar and Nikhil Mutha For the Department : Shri B.C. Malakar ORDER PER BENCH: The captioned four appeals by the Revenue involve a common issue pertaining to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 07 on 04.12.2006 declaring total income of ₹ 66,11,91,012/-. In an assessment finalized under section 143(3) of the Act, dated 27.11.2008, the Assessing Officer, inter-alia, made an addition of ₹ 7,11,34,419/- which represented closing balance of nonrecognition of interest income on Non-Performing Assets (NPAs). The assessee company vide its application dated 02.03.2012 canvassed before the Assessing Officer that there was a mistake apparent from record within the meaning of section 154 of the Act as the opening balance was not reduced from the closing balance of the interest on NPAs while computing the disallowance of ₹ 7,11,34,419/-. The Assessing Officer verified the contention of the assessee and found that opening b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r refund of any amount due to him with this amendment there is no ambiguity in this regard whatsoever and the Assessing Officer was duty bound to determine the revised income which can be lower than the returned income. Accordingly, it is held that the Assessing Officer was not justified in retaining the returned income of _ 66,11,91,012/- in the computation of income even though he had calculated total income of _ 64,77,81,113/-. Therefore, he is directed to compute the total income at _ 64,77,81,113/- and the appellant gets the relief of _ 1,34,09,899/-. The ground is thus allowed. 7. Against the aforesaid, Revenue is in appeal before us by placing reliance on the CBDT s Circular dated 31.10.1989 (supra) and the decision of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... od for the assessment year 1989-90, there was no provision for refund after the regular assessment. In the present case, the assessment years involved are 2006-07 onwards, which pertain to period after section 143(3) of the Act was amended by the Finance Act (No.2) 1998 w.e.f. 01.10.1998. As per the amendment, the assessment under section 143(3) of the Act, inter-alia, envisages the Assessing Officer to grant refund of any amount due to the assessee consequent to the assessment and therefore, the Assessing Officer is statutorily empowered to determine the revised income which can be lower than the returned income. Therefore, in our view, the objection raised by the Revenue to the impugned order of CIT(A) is untenable in the eyes of the la ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
