TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 186
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... had filed a petition for condoning the delay along with affidavit of the General Manager stating therein reasons for delay in filing of the appeal. We have perused the petition and the affidavit filed. We are of the view that there is a reasonable and justifiable cause for 4 days delay in filing of the appeal. Hence, we condone the delay and proceed to dispose of the matter on merits. 2. The relevant grounds read as follows: "The order of the learned Commissioner is opposed to law and facts of the case. 2. Having regard to the provisions of law and the concept of the method of accounting and the mode of determination of the leave encashment allowance, the amount was allowable as deduction u/s 37 of the Act. 3. The order of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d from the due date to the date of filing of revised return which needs to be excluded for the reason that the delay is attributable to assessee and no interest is payable." 4. The assessee filed written objections before the CIT which reads as follows: "1. In so far as the leave encashment balance of Rs. 14,53,596/- it may be noted that the appeal filed by the Department against the decision of Kolkatta High Court is still pending with Supreme Court. 2. Regarding interest payable on the refund, it is submitted that the company has filed the income tax return on or before due date. 3. As the CBDT had notified the introduction of e-filing of returns for Corporates for the first time for AY 2006-07, there was an extension of time ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g officer is directed to add back to the total income a sum of Rs. 14,53,596/- being encashment of earned leave not paid by the due date u/s 43B." 5. The assessee-company, being aggrieved, is in appeal before us. Learned counsel for the assessee submitted that the CIT has erred in invoking the revisionary jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act. It was submitted that the assessment order was perfectly in accordance with law and does not suffer from any error as it was in tune with the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. v. Union of India [2007] 164 Taxman 9. It was submitted that the observation of the CIT that Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Cour....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....t of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT v. Infosys Technologies Ltd. [2012] 341 ITR 293/205 Taxman 98 has held as follows: "The assessing authority performs a quasi-judicial function and the reasons for his conclusions and findings should be forthcoming in the assessment order. Though it is urged on behalf of the assessee by its learned counsel that reasons should be spelt out only in a situation where the assessing authority passes an order against the assessee or adverse to the interests of the assessee and no need for the assessing authority to spell out reasons when the order is accepting the claim of the assessee and the learned counsel submit that this is the legal position on authority, we are afraid that to a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... is a settled law non-consideration of mandatory provisions of law in an order will lead the same to be erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of revenue. 6.2 We are of the opinion that the CIT is justified in stating that the Hon'ble Supreme Court has stayed the operation of the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court in the case of Exide Industries Ltd. (supra) which has struck down clause (f) to sec. 43B. The Hon'ble Supreme Court, while admitting the SLP filed by the revenue against the judgment of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court observed thus: 'We further make it clear that the assessee would during the pendency of this Civil Appeal, pay tax as if section 43B(f) is on the Statute Book but at the same t....