2016 (7) TMI 1083

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....06 on the following grounds: "1(a).On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT (A) erred in deleting the addition of' 2,82,31,142/-, made U/S 115JB by way of disallowance of brought forward un absorbed depreciation, without appreciating that as per the provisions of sec. 79, loss prior to A.Y 1999-00 is not allowed to be carried forward and set off." l(b). "On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Id. CIT (A) erred in deleting the enhancement made to the book profit u/s 154 by way of disallowance of brought forward un absorbed depreciation, without appreciating that the disallowance was made after issue of proper notice u/s 154 and after giving proper opportunity of being hear....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ly incorrect and, therefore, rightly reversed by the Ld.CIT(A;hence, the order of the Ld.CIT(A) should be upheld and appeal of the revenue should be dismissed. 4. We have gone through the orders passed by lower authorities and statements made by both the sides before us. In this case, original assessment order was passed u/s 143(3) dt. 31-12-2008. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer issued notice u/s 154 on 11-03-2010 proposing to rectify the earlier assessment order on the ground that credit for unabsorbed deprecation / loss was wrongly granted and that mistake was required to be corrected. On the same date, i.e. on 11-03-2010 without giving any opportunity to the assessee and without waiting for any reply of the assessee, the Assessing....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... years to support this statement. The A.R. submitted that the statement clearly shows that even after adjustment of profits for A.Yrs.2000-01, 2001-(12, 2002-02, 2003-04 and 2004-05 the unabsorbed business loss was Rs. 24,76,40,OOO/- whereas the unabsorbed depreciation was Rc;.3,OB,89,OOO/-. Since the figure of unabsorbed depreciation' was lesser of the two, the same was rightly claimed as deduction in ITR Jar AYr.2005-06 11ed by the appellant company and the same was rightly accepted by the Add!. CIT., after due verification in assessment order dated 31.12.200B. 4.2 I have considered the AO.'s order as well as appellant's ARs submission. Having considered both and after taking note of the appellant AR's arguments, I am of th....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....me filed. The appellant's submission of the chart is annexed with this order as Annexure "A". Having taken note of the same, I find that even on t.ie basis of appellant's record, the AO. was completely unjustified while rectifying the aforesaid order. Thus, after taking note of the appellant's submission, AO.'s order and all the facts available on record, I consider it proper and appropriate to hold that the A.O. was completely unjustified in his action in rectifying the assessment order. Accordingly, the same is deleted. Thus, appellant's this ground of appeal is decided in favour of the appellant." 6. It is thus noted from the perusal of the above that the CIT(A) had analysed the facts in detail and found that there....