9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (4) TMI 2089X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nvenience, by dealing with ITA No. 5827/Del/2015 (AY 2011- 12) and the result thereof will apply mutatis mutandis to other appeal for the assessment year 2012-13. 2. The grounds raised in ITA No. 5827/Del/2015 (AY 2011- 12) read as under:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 2,39,93,102/- on account of derecognized interest. 2. The appellant craves leave for reserving the right to amend, modify, alter, add or forego any ground(s) of appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal. 3. The brief facts of the case are that assessee filed its return of income declaring at Rs. 33,16,15,762/- under the normal provisions of the I.T. Act, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... accrual basis on NPA as income of the year as per the provision of section 145 of the I.T. Act, 1961. Further AO placed reliance upon the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, in the matter of Southern Technologies Ltd., even on the de-recognition of interest is in favour of the department. AO further observed that as the facts remain the same in the assessee's case, the de-recognised interest amounting to Rs. 2,39,93,102/- was treated as income of the assessee and added to its total income. Accordingly, the AO assessed he income of the assessee at Rs. 35,58,25,770/- under the normal provisions of the Act and at book profit of Rs. 34,04,09,150/- u/s. 115JB of the Act vide order dated 17.2.2014 passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act. Against the as ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... "As far as the first issue goes, the question of law is covered against the Revenue by two decision, i.e. CIT vs. Vasisth Chay Vyapar Ltd. and Anr. 330 ITR 440 (Del.) and DIT vs. Brahamputra Capital Finance Ltd. 335 ITR 182. As far as the second aspect goes, we notice that the Revenue had succeeded before the ITAT in light of the judgment of the Supreme Court in Southern Technologies Ltd. vs. JCIT 320 ITR 577 (SC). The Revenue is not in appeal in respect of that question. Following the decision in Vasisth Chay Vyapar ltd. (Supra) and Brahamputra Capital Finance Ltd. (Supra), the question of law urged by the Revenue is answered against it and in favour of the assessee." Since the issue has been decided in earlier years in favour ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
