TMI Blog2024 (1) TMI 757X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the light of the decision of Supreme Court in GKN Drive Shafts (India) Ltd.[supra] - Thus this exercise shall be carried out by the respondent, within a period of eight (8) weeks from the date of receipt. - Honourable Mr.Justice C.Saravanan For the Petitioner : Mr.R.Vijayaraghavan Mr.R.Venkatanarayanan for M/s. Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan Ramamani For the Respondent : Mr.V.Mahalingam Senior Standing Counsel ORDER The petitioner is aggrieved by the impugned assessment order dated 31.12.2019 passed by the Assessing Officer, the respondent herein under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. The impugned order has a re-determined the taxable income of the petitioner as Rs. 62,93,86,042/. Although, the impugned order is an appealable order, the petitioner has filed this Writ Petition. 3. The petitioner had earlier filed a Return of Income for the assessment year 2012-13 under section 139 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on 28.09.2012. In the said Return of Income, the petitioner had declared a taxable income of Rs. 56,13,25,680/-. 4. The Assessing Officer vide scrutiny Assessment Order dated 31.03.2015 under section 143 (3) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... x (Appeals) was appealed before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No. 331/MDS/2017 By the Income Tax Department. 16. The Appellate Tribunal by its order dated 09.10.2017 allowed the department's appeal following its decision in Computer Age Management Service Private Limited vide order dated 28.11.2014 in ITA No. 1259-1261/MDS/2014, following its decision REI Agro Ltd versus DC IT wherein it was held that disallowance under section 14 A read with rule 8D can be made only by taking into consideration of the investments which has given rise to such income, which does not form part of the total income. 17. It is in this background, the petitioner has been issued with a notice under section 148 of the Income Tax Act, 1960 seeking to reopen the assessment on the ground that the Department had reasonable grounds to believe that income chargeable to tax for the Assessment Year 2012-13 escaped Assessment within the meaning of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 18. The reasons for reopening the assessment on the ground of income having escaped assessment for the above assessment year was furnished to the petitioner by the respondent on 13.05.2019. About 8 dif ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to be disallowed. Issue 3 As per letter dated 10-02-2015 of assessee, disallowance as per sec. 14A rw. Rule 6D is Rs. 67,76.073 out of which sum of Rs. 2.67.000 was already disallowed by assesse and balance amount to be disallowed is Rs. 65,09.073. As against this, only a sum of Rs. 52.87.068 had been disallowed resulting in short disallowance of Rs. 12.21.105 which needs to be added back. Issue 4 As per letter dated 10-02-2015 of assessee, disallowance u/s 35(2AB) is Rs. 1.59.000 since R D expenditure allowed by DSR is Rs. 2626.90 lakhs as against sum of Rs. 26.28.48.925 claimed by assesse. However AO omitted to make such disallowance. It has to be verified and the excess deduction granted of Rs. 1,59,000 has to be disallowed. Issue 5 As per Col. 29 of Sch.BP of return of income, assesse claimed deduction of Rs. 17,50,000 u/s 35AC. As per Col.15 of Form 3CD audit report also, the claim is made u/s 35AC. However it is seen that assesse paid only sum of Rs. 10 lakhs during the year to Vision Research Foundation which is eligible for deduction @ 100% and not @ 175% as claimed by assesse. It has to be verified and the excess deduction granted of Rs. 7,50,000 has to be dis ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 40(a)(ia) provides that if TDS was made in a subsequent year or paid after the due date prescribed u/s 139(1), it will be allowed as deduction in the previous year in which the TDS was paid. In this case, expenditure incurred in A.Y.2010-11 of which TDS was paid during 18-04-2012 to 18-09-2012 amounting to Rs. 84,79,902 was claimed as deduction in A.Y.2012-13 instead of A.Y.2013-14. It has to be verified and the excess deduction granted of Rs. 84.79.902 has to be disallowed. 4) Hence, I have every reason to believe that the income chargeable to tax has escaped assessment under the provisions of section 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 5) In this connection you are required to show-cause as to why not the above said provisions for return rights be disallowed and added back. Your objections, if any, should reach this office by 24.05.2019. A formal notice u/s 143(2) is also enclosed herewith. 20. The petitioner, replied to the same which has now culminated in the impugned Assessment Order dated 31.12.2019 under section 143(3) read with section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 21. The challenge to the impugned Assessment Order is on the ground that no speaking order was pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
