9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (12) TMI 1974X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his appeal, although the assessee has raised multiple Grounds of appeal, but the entire dispute emanates from an order passed by the Assessing Officer under Section 154 of the Act amending/rectifying the assessment order passed under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 28.02.2013 determining the book profit under Section 115JB of the Act of Rs. 6,95,57,438/-. The said action of the Assessing Officer has since been upheld by the CIT(A), against which assessee is in further appeal before the Tribunal. 3. Insofar as the relevant facts are concerned, the same can be appreciated as follows. An assessment under Section 143(3) of the Act dated 28.02.2013 was completed by the Assessing Officer determining the total income at NIL, which corresponded to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... office on 15-01-2014 has disagreed to the proposed rectification. The submission made by the assessee is considered but not found acceptable for the reason that the liability u/s 115JB is worked out incorrectly. Since the mistake is apparent from the record, the assessment is rectified under section 154 of the I.T. Act. Revised accordingly. Total income as per order dated 28-02-2013 remains unchanged to Rs. Nil but income u/s 115JB will be revised as under: Net profit as per P/L Account 3,72,43,272 Add : Provision for Bad & Doubtful Debts 2,25,37,650 Provision for Doubtful Advances 86,72,263 Provision for Absolute Inventory 1,69,656 Provision for Service Tax 32,95,130 7,19,17,971 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the submissions put forth by the assessee, but has merely gone by the ratio of the judgment of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs Mysore Breweries Ltd. (2009) 227 CTR (Kar) 569 and the amendment made by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2009 w.e.f. 01.04.1998 on the point that while determining the book profit, the amount relatable to Provision for bad and doubtful debts was not a deductible element. Further, the CIT(A) noted that the amendment carried out by the Assessing Officer was within the purview of Sec. 154 of the Act as it was an error of law. In this manner, the CIT(A) has dismissed the appeal of the assessee, against which assessee is in appeal before us. 6. Before us, the learned representative for the assessee r ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... d., 307 ITR 150 (Delhi) for the said proposition. Apart therefrom, it has been pointed out that adjustment of Rs. 5,29,73,854/- was available on the basis of audited accounts inasmuch as Sec. 115JB of the Act permits deduction of an amount which is lower of depreciation or loss. It is pointed out that denial of such adjustment has resulted in determination of book profit, which is inconsistent with the provisions of law. 8. On the other hand, the ld. DR appearing for the Revenue has vehemently supported the orders of the authorities below by placing reliance thereon. It was pointed out that there was clearly an error on the part of the Assessing Officer in not determining the liability under Section 115JB of the Act while computing the ori ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... herefore, there was an under-assessment of income. In this context, it has been consistently asserted before the lower authorities as well as before us that assessee had duly furnished the computation of book profit for the purposes of Sec. 115JB of the Act in the prescribed Form 29B, which had resulted in NIL liability. Therefore, so far as the assessee was concerned, it had cleared its stand which was very much before the Assessing Officer when he passed the original assessment order. Thus, the error of assessee not having declared its manner of computation of book profit under Section 115JB of the Act is not something which is reflected by the record. Even otherwise, the adjustment which has been made by the Assessing Officer, disagreein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
