Tribunal sets aside CIT(A)'s order, directs AO to review interest computation methodology.

The Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal, setting aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and directing the AO to review the accrued interest computation. The Tribunal suggested accepting the consistent methodology of the appellant, verified by auditors, and limited the addition to the net difference over FYs 2009-10 to 2013-14. The discrepancy was attributed to variances in methodologies, not understating income, leading to a revised addition of Rs. 1,18,734.

---

---

Issues:
Challenging addition to interest income due to difference between Form 26AS and declared income.

Analysis:
The appellant, engaged in asset reconstruction, challenged the addition made by the Ld. CIT(A) to interest income due to a variance between interest income in Form 26AS and that declared. The AO observed a discrepancy of Rs. 51,57,949 in the interest income. The appellant claimed to follow the Mercantile System of Accounting, accounting for interest on fixed deposits on a time basis. The appellant argued that differences in interest income arise due to unknown bank methodologies. The AO added the difference to the total income and book profits u/s. 115JB. The Ld. CIT(A) upheld this decision, prompting the appeal.

The appellant and AO did not seek details from banks regarding interest credits, leading to uncertainty about the variance. The appellant's representative argued that interest accrual is verified by auditors and follows accepted principles. The representative highlighted potential differences in bank and appellant methodologies, affecting interest income calculations. The Ld. AR emphasized that discrepancies neutralize upon fixed deposit maturity. The Ld. DR supported the AO's decision based on Rule 37BA and the Act.

The Tribunal noted the absence of bank details and differing methodologies, likely causing the interest income variance. The Tribunal acknowledged that if methodologies differ, interest income calculations would not align. The Tribunal highlighted the spreading of TDS credit over relevant income-offering years. As the discrepancy stemmed from methodology differences, not understating income, the Tribunal suggested accepting the appellant's consistent methodology, verified by auditors. The Tribunal directed the AO to review the appellant's accrued interest computation, potentially limiting the addition to Rs. 1,18,734, the net difference over FYs 2009-10 to 2013-14, to resolve the matter.

In conclusion, the Tribunal allowed the appellant's appeal for statistical purposes, setting aside the Ld. CIT(A)'s order and remanding the issue to the AO for reevaluation based on the discussion.

---