TMI Blog2022 (1) TMI 489X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the present case, the Commissioner, on the basis of material on record, recorded a categorical finding of fact, which has been affirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in further appeal exercising the powers conferred on it by Section 254 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and we find no legal error in exercise of powers by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. Tribunal has committed no illegality in upholding the finding of fact recorded by the commissioner income tax deleting the addition made on account of bad debt by holding that the assessee has not raised any claim of bad debts either in the profit and loss account or balance sheet. Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in dismissing the appeal of the Department by affirmin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as challenged the judgement and order dated 09-06-2017 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Lucknow in Income Tax Appeal Number 112/LKW/2017. 4 . The following two substantial questions of law have been framed in the memorandum of the appeal:- Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon ble ITAT is justified in deleting the addition of ₹ 5,97,61,000/ made on account of bad debt without appreciating the fact that the assessing officer made the addition as the books of accounts of the assessee corporation were not audited under section 40 4AB of the income tax act, 1961 and it could not be ascertained whether bandits were actually written off in the books or not? Whether on the facts a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and Auditor General of India. We have divisions all over U.P. and Head Office at Lucknow. For each Division and Head Office, separate auditors are appointed by CAG. During the year there is a delay in appointment of auditors by C AG for Divisional Officers and for Head Office. Audit of accounts are not finally completed yet. 8 . As the case was getting barred by limitation on 31.03.2015 in absence of audit report and the audit was still pending, the assessee filed its return by computing its income at ₹ 23,19,68,000/- on the basis of the returned income and adjustments reflected in the provisional accounts, which was later on revised to ₹ 24,07,64,886/-. 9. In the Assessment Order dated 30-03-2015, the Assessing Of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bad debts. 11. The Income Tax Department challenged the aforesaid order dated 30- 11-2016 by filing ITA number 112/LKW/2017 before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal at Lucknow, which has been dismissed by the impugned judgement and order dated 09-06-2017. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has recorded a categorical finding that the assessee has not raised any claim of bad debt either in the profit and loss account or balance sheet. The Assessing Officer has made an addition having read provisional profit and loss account without looking to the audited balance sheet. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal accordingly dismissed the appeal filed by the department. 12 . The Department has filed the present appeal under Section 260 of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... oner has all the powers of Assessing Officer and he may affirm, reduce, endorse or annul the assessment. In the present case, the Commissioner, on the basis of material on record, recorded a categorical finding of fact, which has been affirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in further appeal exercising the powers conferred on it by Section 254 (1) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and we find no legal error in exercise of powers by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 15 . Accordingly we answer that substantial questions of law formulated in the appeal as follows: (i) In view of the facts and circumstances of the case it is clear that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has committed no illegality in upholding the finding of fact recor ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 1) (c) of the Income Tax Act 1961 (as amended till date) by the Assessing Officer was deleted without taking into consideration the specific provision of law as contained under section 292-B of the Income Tax Act 1961 (as amended till date)? 18 . Since the order passed by the Assessing Officer holding that the assessee had wrongly claimed benefit of bad debts written off was set aside by the Commissioner in appeal and the Commissioner s order has been affirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and Income Tax Appeal No. 40 of 2017 filed by the department against the aforesaid order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has been dismissed, consequently this appeal is also liable to be dismissed. 19 . In view of the aforesaid dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
