9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (1) TMI 1383X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... lead case. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against an order of the Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-V, Pune dated 08.11.2013 which in turn has arisen from an order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 154 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") dated 14.03.2012 pertaining to the assessment year 2006-07. ITA No.79/PN/2012 ITA No.521/PN/2013 3. In this appeal, the Revenue has taken the following Grounds of Appeal:- 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) was justified in directing the AO to take the taxable income at Rs. 64,77,81,113/- in the order passed u/s 154 of the IT Act, when the AO had rightly retained the returned income of Rs. 66,11,91,012/-. 2. Whether on the facts and ci ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s. 154 dated 14.12.2011 - Rs. 68,01,46,630/- Less Relief u/s.154 - Rs. 3,23,65,517/- Revised Income - Rs. 64,77,81,113/- 5. However, while concluding in the order passed under section 154 of the Act, dated 14.03.2012, Assessing Officer retained the income at Rs. 66,11,91,012/- on the ground that the assessed income could not be less than the returned income. The assessee was aggrieved with the action of Assessing Officer in not determining the assessed income at Rs. 64,77,81,113/-, as verified by him. Assessee contested the action of the Assessing Officer in appeal before CIT(A). 6. The CIT(A) upheld the plea of the assessee by noticing the amendment made to section 143(3) of the Act by the Finance Act (No.2) 1998 w.e.f. 01.10.1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d arising to the assessee after finalization of assessment under section 143(3) of the Act cannot be denied. In this context, our attention has also been drawn to the detailed discussion made by the CIT(A) in the impugned order. 9. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. In our considered opinion, the discussion made by the CIT(A) in para 10 of the impugned order, which we have extracted above, settles the controversy in favour of the assessee. The reliance placed by the Revenue on the CBDT's Circular dated 31.10.1989 (supra) and the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of LML Ltd. Vs. ACIT (supra) is quite mis-placed having regard to the facts and circumstances of the present case. Ostensibly, the CBDT's Circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
