2014 (10) TMI 361

Introducing the “In Favour Of” filter in Case Laws.

⚖️ Instantly identify judgments decided in favour of the Assessee, Revenue, or Appellant
🔍 Narrow down results with higher precision

2014 (10) TMI 361

X X X X Extracts X X X X

....The Assessing Officer processed the return under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. He disallowed part of the claim referable to Section 80HHC of the Act. The respondent filed an application under Section 154 of the Act, before the Assessing Officer, for rectification, and it was rejected. Thereupon, he filed appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The same was allowed through order, dated 21.04.1998, placing reliance upon the judgment of the Bombay High Court in Tanna Exports v. M.G.Kamat and the order 202 ITR 219 of assessment was rectified. Feeling aggrieved by that, the Revenue filed I.T.A.No.647/Hyd/1998 before the Hyderabad Bench of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short the Tribunal). The appeal was dismissed through....

X X X X Extracts X X X X

....tion 143(1)(a) of the Act cannot be resorted to, once there is any disagreement or controversy, vis-a-vis the details of the returns. In other words, the contested aspects cannot be dealt with under that procedure. the instant case, the Assessing Officer adopted the procedure under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Had it been a case where he totally accepted the facts and figures contained in the returns in their entirety, there would not have been any grievance for the respondent. However, the Assessing Officer disallowed part of the claim referable to Section 80HHC of the Act. The Commissioner found fault with the same and his view was upheld by the Tribunal. It is true that there is nothing in law, which prohibits an Assessing Officer to ....

X X X X Extracts X X X X

....eption can be taken to it, if the disallowed claim is referable to the relevant provision, such as the explanation. For example, if an item claimed as deduction in the returns, is found to be inconsistent with another entry, in the same returns, or the information required to be furnished under the Act was not furnished, or where the deduction claimed exceeds the statutory limit, that part of it can be disallowed, even without taking recourse to the procedure under sub-sections (2) and (3) of Section 143 of the Act. Therefore, a subtle distinction needs to be maintained, in the context of recourse to one procedure or the other. Though mere disallowance of a part of the claim made in a return, may not vitiate, the exercise under Section 14....

Contact Us At :

FAQs :

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

2014 (10) TMI 361