TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (6) TMI 374
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... income-tax (Appeals) [hereinafter referred o as the CIT(A) has erred in holding that proceedings u/s 147 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (' the Act') are valid despite the fact that the notice u/s 148 of the Act had been issued on account of mere change of opinion. 2. Based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in holding that the learned Assessing Officer was correct in extending the scope of reassessment proceedings to the issues which were not recorded in the reasons for reopening the assessment and carrying out the detailed scrutiny assessment u/s 148 of the Act. 3. Without prejudice, based on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT(A) has erred in holding that the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... a double disallowance with regard to the marketing expenditure, having regard to the facts of the case. (ITA No. 2147/Del/2010) "1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition made by the Assessing Officer on account of provision of gratuity. 2. That of the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of provision for warranty of Rs. 1,77,45,202/-. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) erred in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1,71,95,149/- out of foreign travel expenses. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the CIT(A) erred in delet....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of Rs. 225.97 lacs......" 7. The Assessee inspected A.O's records on 21/11/2005 and found that proceedings u/s 148 of the Act were initiated solely on the basis of audit objection suggesting that provisions, being unascertained liabilities, which should be added to book profit for 115JA. 8. The Assessee filed letter dated 28/11/2005 and objected the legality of first 148 notice (dated 29/9/2004) stating that as 4 years had expired after end of Assessment Year 99-00 prior approval of JCIT was mandatory u/s 151 of the Act and it was found that no such approval had been obtained. In the said letter the validity of Section 148 notice was also challenged based on absence of reason to believe that income had escaped assessment and Re-asse....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....on before the A.O. The Assessing Officer disallowed 20% of foreign travelling expenses to the extent of Rs. 1,71,95,149/-, provision for warranty to the extent of Rs. 1,77,45,202/-, FOC marketing expenses (after depreciation) to the extent of Rs. 18,41,099/- as well as disallowed 25% of provision for obsolescence of inventory to the extent of Rs. 12,13,037/- and made addition to closing stock for Rs. 29,60,347. 12. The CIT(A) rejected NIPL's arguments on Section 148 and deleted the disallowance of 20% of foreign travelling expenses and provision for warranty, but sustained the other issues. 13. The present appeal and cross appeal are filed by Revenue and assessee respectively. 14. The Ld. AR submitted that the first notice was with....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assessment of income of Rs. 1,69,67,732/- involving short recovery of tax of Rs. 69,48,229/- under special provision of the Act. I have gone through the records. Keeping in view the above objection, it is found that the liabilities mentioned by the Audit had been declared in his return of income as ascertained liabilities as per Section 115JA Sub Sec.(2) Clause (c) of the I.T. Act. The return was processed U/s 143(1) and as there was prima facie no evidence that the liabilities were not ascertained liabilities in view of the above mentioned assessee's self declaration, these liabilities were not be added to the net profit while computing the Book Profit and therefore, the issue raised by the audit is not accepted. In view....