9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (6) TMI 1777X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... cts in rectifying the alleged mistake as a mistake apparent from the record even though the issue is a highly debatable one. 4. Without prejudice to Grounds No. 2 & 3 above, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in holding that the accumulated depreciation loss as on 1.4.2006 has become nil and therefore, no amount can be set-off while computing the book profits u/s 115 JB of the Act. 5. That the appellant denies its liability to pay interest u/s 234B of the Act. 6. That the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in law and on facts in upholding the interest charged u/s 234B of the Act in a proceeding u/s 154 of the Act. Each of the above grounds is without prejudice to one another and the appellant craves leave of the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Bangalore to add, delete, amend or otherwise modify one or more of the above grounds either before or at the time of hearing of this appeal." 3. At the very outset, it was submitted by ld. AR of assessee that there is delay of two days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal and the assessee has made an application for condonation of delay in which it is submitted th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) and before us that the issue in dispute is a debatable issue and therefore, the order passed by AO u/s. 154 is not valid. Although this aspect of the matter is rejected by CIT(A), but before us, the assessee has placed reliance on a judgement of Hon'ble Delhi High Court rendered in the case of CIT Vs. Eli Lilly and Co. India P. Ltd. (supra). We reproduce paras 2 to 5 of this judgement which are relevant and hence, the same are reproduced hereinbelow for the sake of ready reference. "2. The assessee had filed Income Tax Return showing losses. Since losses under the normal provisions were much higher than the loss computed as per the book profit under Section 115 JA of the Income-Tax Act (hereinafter referred to as the "Act‟), this return was processed under Section 143(1) of the Act and was completed on 7th March, 2002 after accepting the return as filed. The Assessing Officer, however, issued notice under Section 154/143 (1) of the Act as according to him a mistake apparent on the face of record had occurred while accepting the return vide assessment orders dated 7th March, 2002. We may point out here that the assessee had incurred losses in earlier years which remained u ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 15 crores. Even after absorbing the entire profits of the year 1999- 2000, against the carried forward losses, losses still remained unabsorbed and the unabsorbed depreciation was not even touched. This figure of unabsorbed depreciation i.e. Rs. 1,39,36,000/- remained as it is and it is under these circumstance, this figure was carried forward to the assessment year in question and this is how in the returns filed, the amount of unabsorbed depreciation of Rs. 1,39,36,000/- was set off being the lower of the two namely unabsorbed losses and unabsorbed depreciation, having regard to Clause (iii) to the Explanation of Section 115 JA of the Act. According to him, in these circumstances, the exercise carried out by the Assessing Officer while rectifying the order was not permissible. In the process of doing so, the Assessing Officer has treated Rs. 1,39,36,000/- as unabsorbed depreciation to be set off against the profits earned in the year 1999- 2000 and after setting off those profits, he has assumed that the carried forward depreciation would be Rs. 80,38,600/-. It is on this basis, it is argued that it is not an error apparent on the face of record and rather it depends on the inter ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ) Rs. 14,21,44,000 MAT COMPUTATION DONE BY ASSESSEE Profit as per Profit and Loss AccountRs. 58,98,000 Less: lower of Unabsorbed Depreciation And brought forward business loss (Rs. 1,39,36,000) [As per explanation (ii) of the second proviso to section 115JA (2)] ........................ Book Profit Rs. (80,38,000)" As on 31.03.199 (as per books) (iii) Unabsorbed Depreciation Rs. 1,39,36,000 (iv)Business Loss (excluding depreciation) to be carried forward Rs. 13,62,46,000* *[Rs. 14,21,44,000-Rs. 58,98,000] ....................... Aggregate Loss Rs. 15,01,82,000 Assessment Year 2000-01 MAT COMPUTATION DONE BY ASSESSEE Profit as per Profit and Loss Account Rs. 1,23,00,504 Add: Provision for Doubtful Debts Rs. 3,49,292 Add: Provision for Doubtful Advances Rs. 3,21,696 Less: lower of Unabsorbed Depreciation And brought forward business loss (Rs. 1,39,36,000) [As per explanation (ii) of the second proviso to section 115 JA (2)] ..................... Balance Profit Rs. (9,64,508) As on 31.03.2000 (as per books) (v) Unabsorbed Depreciation Rs. 139,36,000 (vi) Business Losses (excluding depreciation) to be carried forward Rs. 12,39,45,496* *[Rs. 13,62,46,00 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
