TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (5) TMI 258
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ufacturing and sale of EMV and ferro minerals. An E-return was filed by the assessee Company for the assessment year 200910 on 26.9.2009 declaring the total income of nearly Rs. 1008,53,44,720/. The notice under Section 142 (1) of the Income Tax Act pertaining to the assessment year 200910 for furnishing the details in respect of twenty items mentioned in the notice dated 20.11.2011 was served on the appellant assessee. As in this case we are concerned with the admissibility or otherwise of the claim of the assessee for deduction in respect of the Corporate Social Responsibility, it would be necessary to only refer to item no.9 in the notice under Section 142 (1) of the Act. As per the said item, the Assessing Officer asked the assessee to give a detailed note of expenditure for the Corporate Social Responsibility along with the bifurcation of the expenses under different heads. In pursuance of the said notice, a reply dated 23.12.2011 was served by the assessee on the Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Nagpur. In paragraph 8 of the reply, which runs into more than five pages, the appellant - assessee had given the bifurcation of the expenses under various heads towards the C....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lar claims made by the assessee were allowed by the Assessing Officer and there was no interference with the assessment orders during the previous years. It is submitted that similar claim was granted in respect of Corporate Social Responsibility during the previous years and the Commissioner of Income Tax has wrongly invoked the jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act though the Assessing Officer had applied his mind to the explanation tendered by the assessee and while allowing the said claim had refused to allow the others after recording reasons for doing so. The learned Counsel took this Court though the judgments of the Bombay High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax...Versus...Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd., reported in (2015) 372 ITR 303 (Bom.) and Commissioner of Income Tax...Versus...Nirav Modi, reported in (2016) 138 DTR 81 (Bom.) to submit that if a query is raised during the assessment proceedings and if the assessee responds to the said query, merely because the said aspect is not dealt with in the assessment order, would not lead to a conclusion that the Assessing Officer had not applied his mind to the response of the assessee. It is stated that while hol....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....queries pertaining to different heads were made therein. The ninth query in the notice under Section 142 (1) of the Act pertains to the expenditure for the Corporate Social Responsibility. By the said query, the assessee was directed to give a detailed note of expenditure for the Corporate Social Responsibility along with bifurcation of the expenses under different heads. An exhaustive reply was submitted by the assessee to the notice under Section 142 (1) of the Act. In paragraph 8 of the reply, the assessee gave the detailed note pertaining to the expenditure for the Corporate Social Responsibility under different heads that runs into several pages. The heads under which the expenses were made towards the Corporate Social Responsibility were specifically mentioned as health, environment, sports, education etc. and for each of the different heads, particulars were given in respect of every minor or major expenses. A detailed note on the expenditure on the Corporate Social Responsibility claim was given in paragraph 8 which runs into more than five pages. It is not disputed that the appellant assessee is a Government of India undertaking and the Government has a control over the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d. (Supra) this Court found that from the nature of the expenditure as explained by the assessee in that case the Assessing Officer took a possible view and therefore, it was not a case where the provisions of Section 263 of the Act could have been resorted to. Considering the explanation of the assessee in this case, we are also of the view that the Assessing Officer had taken a possible view. In the case of Nirav Modi (Supra) this Court held that the Tribunal was justified in that case in cancelling the order under Section 263 of the Act as the assessee had responded to the query made to it during the assessment proceedings and merely because the assessment order did not mention the same, it would not lead to a conclusion that the Assessing Officer had not applied his mind to the case. In the instant case, we find that the Assessing Officer has applied his mind to the claims made by the assessee and wherever the claims were disallowable they have been discussed in that assessment order and there is no discussion or reference in respect of the claims that were allowed. In view of the law laid down in the judgments in the case of Fine Jewellery (India) Ltd. (Supra) and Nirav Modi (....