9911796707
TMI Blog2024 (12) TMI 699X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ad erred in law by making the addition under section 143(1) of the Act and passing the rectification order under section 154 of the Act in a purely mechanical nature without any reasoning and application of mind. 4. The learned CIT(A) had erred in law and in facts by dismissing the CIT(A) appeal on the grounds that the addition of the GST refund received by the Appellant is not a mistake apparent on record and hence would be outside the purview of the rectification order. 5. The learned CIT(A) had erred in law by failing to adjudicate on the adjustment made by the CPC with regard to the addition of the GST Input tax credit refund received by the Appellant during the subject AY without taking the submissions made by the Appellant into consideration. The Appellant craves leave to add to or alter, by deletion, substitution or otherwise, any or all of the above grounds of appeal, and to submit such statements, documents and papers as may be considered necessary either at or at any time before the hearing of this appeal. 3. The assessee has also moved an application for admitting & adjudicating additional grounds of appeal under Rule 11 of the Income Tax Rules, 1962, [ in short t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the CPC brushed aside the objections filed by the Company, and passed an intimation u/s 143(1) of the act vide DIN CPC/2122/A6/312217856 dated 13 November 2022 making an addition of Rs 15,73,86,696/- to the returned income and demanding a sum of Rs 3,54,28,530/- payable for AY 2021-22. A summary of additions made u/s 143(1) of Act, is stated below: S.No. Particulars Amount as per the ITR (INR) Amount as per the TAR (INR) Proposed addition (INR) 1 Inconsistency in any sum payable towards leave encashment claimed in return and tax audit report 10,40,718 - 10,40,718 2 Inconsistency in any amount debited to profit and loss account of the previous year but disallowable under section 43B claimed in retum and tax audit report 30,36,110 - 30,36,110 3 Inconsistency in amount mentioned in return at Sl. No. 5(b) of Part A OI "The proforma credits, drawbacks, refund of duty of customs or excise or service tax, or refund of sales tax or value added tax, or refund of GST, where such credits, drawbacks or refunds are admitted as due by the authorities concerned and tax audit report - 15,33,09,868 15,33,09,868 15,73,86,696 5. According to the a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed with remarks 'Amount of CENVAT credit availed or utilized is not passed through the statement of profit/loss'. And that the sum above reported in the TAR for AY 2021- 22 constitutes Service Tax and Goods and Service Tax paid by the Company in the past which was refunded by the tax authorities during AY 2021-22. At time of payment, the Company regularly accounted such amounts an asset balance, as such taxes were refundable in nature. In the financial statements, the same was reported under the head 'Balances with Government Authorities' under 'Note 13: Long term loans and advances in the asset side of the balance sheet. And during any assessment years, no portion of the above sum was debited to the profit and loss account as expense nor was claimed as a deduction for the purpose of computation of the total taxable income. Hence, it was contented that the proposal to treat the GST Refund of Rs.15,33,09,868/- was flawed/unwarranted. 7. However, the Ld.CIT(A) who was pleased to dismiss the same by holding as under: 5. DECISION: I have duly perused the Order of AO, submission of the appellant and other available material on record. 5.1. The appellant is in ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ially accounted as asset and not claimed as expenses in any assessment year and since, such receipts were only a realization of an asset/receivables balance reported in the balance sheet of the company and the same will not constitute taxable receipts/income for AY 2021-22. However, the CPC by intimation dated 13.11.2022 ignored the objection of the assessee and not only made adjustment in respect of the GST/CENVAT refund of Rs.15,33,09,868/- made adjustment in respect of leave encashment of Rs.10,40,718/- and also disallowed u/s.43B of Rs.30,36,110/-. Pursuant to the same, the assessee filed rectification application on 01.12.2022 and pointed out to us that in the format for it, the assessee had three options (i) return data correction offline mode (ii) tax credit mismatch correction (TDS/TCS advance) & (iii) re-process the return; and the assessee has selected "re-process the return" since the assessee's case doesn't fall under the other two modes. Thereafter, the assessee received a rectification order u/s.154 dated 24.01.2023 deleting the two-addition totaling Rs.40,76,830/- and restricted the addition to Rs.15,33,09,868/-. On appeal, the assessee assailed the addition reiterat ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
