2014 (9) TMI 938

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... First, we take up the Revenue's appeal in ITA No.3017/Ahd/2010 for AY 2002-03. The Revenue has raised the following grounds of appeal:- 1. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in quashing the proceedings initiated u/s.147 of the Act, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record by the AO. 1.2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in quashing the proceedings initiated u/s.147 of the Act by holding that the reasons have been recorded by one Officer and the notice u/s.148 has been issued by another Officer, relying on the decision of the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Hynoop Food & Oil Industries Ltd., without appreciating the ratio of the subsequent decision of the Hon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the action of the A.O. in reopening the assessment u/s.147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 even though the assessment so made is illegal and bad in law. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has erred in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 4,89,008/- made by the A.O. being the amount of amortization expenses/deferred revenue expenditure. 3. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have allowed the carried forward of the losses to the next year as claimed by the appellant. 4. The appellant craves leave to ad, alter, amend or modify any of the grounds of appeal on or before the date of hearing of appeal." 6. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the as....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nder the IT Act, the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Madras Industrial Investment Corporation Ltd., Supreme Court has held that if the benefit accrued from a particular expenditure for a specified period of time, then the expenditure can be spread over for the entire period. However, in the instant case, there is no such specified period for the loss to be spread over. The AR is not able to justify why the loss of Rs. 4,89,008/- could spread over for only 5 years and no other time. In view of the above, the action of the AO in making the addition of Rs. 4,89,008/- is upheld". 8. The contention of the ld.counsel for the assessee is that all the material facts have been disclosed before the AO and the assessment u/s.143(3) of the Act ....