2007 (5) TMI 169

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....tax at 20% in respect of the long term capital gain and at 40% in respect of the remaining income. 3. In an intimation under Section 143(1)(a) of the Act, the Assessing Officer noted that the returned total income under Section 115JA of the Act was Rs. 39,50,258/- and he levied tax on this at 40%. According to learned counsel for the Assessee this was incorrect and tax should have been levied on the long term capital gain at 20% and at 40% on the rest of the income. 4. Feeling aggrieved, the Assessee preferred an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) who noted that while computing the income under Section 115JA of the Act for the purposes of tax, whether the long term capital gain is required to be taxed at 20% as provide....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....aim made by the Assessee. 7. This is what this Court had to say in the matter (page 9) : "We are, therefore, of the considered opinion that under section 143(1)(a) of the Act it is not open to the Assessing officer to make any adjustment in the returned income by disallowing any claim for deduction, allowance or relief, unless he is satisfied on the basis of information available in the return, documents, and the accounts accompanying it that such a claim is inadmissible on the face of it and there is no possibility of any debate thereon on such claim, etc. If anything more is read into the power of the Assessing Officer to make unilateral adjustments, it would render the provision wholly arbitrary and unreasonable because: (a) a disallow....