TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 404X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee for remitting this issue to the file of the AO. These documentations have been specifically examined and assessee failed to create a dent in the finding recorded by the AO. We could appreciate the claim of the assessee if it has some new materials which required to be investigated and if investigated it can give rise to different result. During the course of hearing, we have directed the learned counsel for the assessee to show us the original copies of these acknowledgements so that we can make some decisions about the genuineness of the document. We have also desired let the Directors who have signed those returns filed their affidavits so that some new angle of inquiry could be explored but learned counsel has expressed his inability in filing the affidavits of the Directors/authorized persons who signed these returns as well as original copies of these acknowledgements. We do not see any reason to remit any issue to AO for re-analyzing those very details which have been gone through by both the authorities - ITA No. 277/Ahd/2015 And ITA No. 344/Ahd/2015 - - - Dated:- 3-12-2018 - SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL ME ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... any grievance of the assessee. Hence, it is rejected. 7. Ground Nos. 2, 3 4 are interconnected grounds of appeal. In these grounds, grievance of the assessee is that the learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the stand of the AO that the claim of the assessee with regard to total brought forward unabsorbed depreciation at ₹ 1,44,94,528/- deserves to be rejected. Since, this claim was not allowed by the AO and upheld by the CIT(A), therefore, the book profit under s.115JB was not computed according to the claim made by the assessee. Thus, ground no.4 is dependent upon the outcome of the ground nos. 2 3 in which the assessee has made claim of brought forward unabsorbed depreciation of ₹ 1,44,94,528/-. 8. With the assistance of learned representatives, we gone through the records carefully. The assessee has filed its return of income on 29th September, 2008 declaring total income at nil after set off of brought forward loss of ₹ 8,48,966/-. An assessment under s.143(3) of the Act was passed on 13.12.2010 determining therein total income at nil after set off of brought forward losses of ₹ 9,34,521/- out of total claim of brought forward loss of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... appellant are returns of income) for reference. There are only statements of computation of income, details of income from different heads and details of TDS and depreciation chart in the so called statements of computation of income for the above assessment, year and the same are not signed and not certified either by the appellant or by the AR. It is not known whether the statements of computation of income for above different assessment years copy of which are filed by the AR within his submission dated 15/10/2014 are actually filed by the appellant along with the returns of income, In other words merely from the statements of computation of income it is not clear whether the same are filed by the appellant for the above assessment years along with the returns of income. The fact is that no copy of returns of income for any of the above assessment years is filed by the AR. It is not clear in which ITR, the returns of income are filed by the appellant for the above assessment years. There are no documentary evidences to show that the returns of income for the above assessment years have been filed the appellant u/s 139(1) of the Act. This is in view of the fact that returns ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ring these reassessment proceedings. In my opinion, if the auditor in the audit report has mentioned the brought forward losses of ₹ 39,23,711/-, then claim of the appellant that brought forward losses in its case was ₹ 1,45,03,328/- cannot be accepted otherwise also. In the case of appellant, the auditor himself is reporting in audit report the brought forward losses of ₹ 39,23,711/- and therefore a different version of the appellant with regard to its claim of carried forward losses and that too without any basis in no way can be accepted. It is also mentioned by the AO in the assessment order that no record is available to show that at any given point of time the appellant had ever before claimed brought forward losses totaling to ₹ 1,45,03,028/-. It is mentioned by the AO that the appellant provided copy of e-filed original return of income filed on 29-09-2008 and as per schedule BFLA and schedule CFL thereof the appellant claimed carry forward of losses of ₹ 33,55,019/- after set off of losses of ₹ 8,48,966/-. As per the AO thus, in the return also, the appellant had claimed brought forward losses totaling to ₹ 42,03,985/- only (i.e. 8 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on page 52 the acknowledgement exhibiting filing of return in AY 1999-2000 has been placed. Both these documents have not been relied upon rather they are belied by both the authorities in a concurrent finding. We have perused these acknowledgements alongwith other acknowledgements for other assessment years. We find that the diary number/receipt number showing submission of returns are not verifiable. The Revenue authorities were reluctant in putting their reliance on these documents for accepting the claim of the assessee. They have recorded a finding of fact. We do not find merit in the contention of the learned counsel for the assessee for remitting this issue to the file of the AO. These documentations have been specifically examined and assessee failed to create a dent in the finding recorded by the AO. We could appreciate the claim of the assessee if it has some new materials which required to be investigated and if investigated it can give rise to different result. During the course of hearing, we have directed the learned counsel for the assessee to show us the original copies of these acknowledgements so that we can make some decisions about the genuineness of the docume ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
