TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (9) TMI 728
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....als were clubbed together and are decided by this consolidated order for the sake of convenience. For appreciation of facts we have referred the facts for A.Y. 1994-95. 3. Assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal for A.Y. 1994- 95: - "1. The Learned Commissioner of Income Tax(Appeals)-40 Mumbai [CIT(A)] failed to appreciate that the assessment completed under section 144 of the Income tax Act, 1961 (the act) by the Assessing Officer was bad in law and thereby erred in not directing to cancel the assessment completed. 2. The CIT (A) erred in facts and in law in confirming addition of Rs. 8,14,910/- in respect of interest accrued on advance to companies and Rs. 44,574/-being interest on FOR with Canara Bank. 3. The CIT(A) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see and learned D.R. of the Revenue. The learned A.R. of the assessee argued that the assessee was following cash system of accounting in all earlier years and that the addition cannot be made on accrual basis in the year under consideration. It was argued that on similar issue for A.Y. 2004-05 in ITA No. 6719/Mum/2007 by order dated 21.10.2008 the similar issue was restored to the file of AO. The AO, while giving effect to the order of the Tribunal, have concluded that the assessee was following cash system of accounting. The assessee has placed on record copy of the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 6719/Mum/2007. The order came into effect with the order passed by the AO under section 143(3) r.w.s. 254 of the Act dated 23.11.2009. 6. On ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h method of accounting. The assessee has however produced before us copy of computation of income for assessment year 1990-91 in which the method of accounting has been declared as cash. This material was not available before the authorities in the earlier years. Further, in the computation of income for the impugned assessment year, the assessee has clearly declared the method of accounting as cash in the notes at item No.6. Considering all these factors, we are of the opinion that matter requires fresh consideration particularly in view of the claim that cash method of accounting had been accepted by the department in the computation made for assessment year 1990-91. We therefore set aside the order of the CIT(A) and restore the matter to....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Tax (Appeals)-52, Mumbai [CIT(A)] erred in confirming the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ('the Act') in respect f interest on Fixed Deposit with Bank of India of Rs. 10,83,695/- and Rs. 94,530/-. 2. The CIT(A) failed to appreciate that the appellant had made full disclosure in the Computation of Income and thereby erred in confirming penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act. The appellant therefore prays that the order of the CIT(A) be set aside and the Assessing Officer be directed to delete the penalty levied under section 271(1)(c) of the Act, in respect of the above two additions." 11. The brief facts of the case are that the assessment for the relevant year was completed on 30.03.200....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Special Court's (ORTS) Act relating to securities scam in 1992 all the assets of the assessee were attached by the custodian appointed by the court. The bank account of the assessee was also operated by the custodian. The assessee, after collecting certain information from the office of the custodian filed the return of income. The custodian did not provide the complete information as required by the assessee for filing the return of income. The assessee in the computation of income filed along with the return of income had clearly pointed out the basis on which the return has been prepared and furnished. The assessee specifically invited the attention of the AO to the note to the computation of income that the assessee filed the return of ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ore the AO in his reply filed on 24.10.2005. 15. On the other hand, the learned D.R. for Revenue supported the orders of the authorities below. The learned D.R. further argued that the assessee has not disclosed the interest income while filing the return of income. It is not the case that the assessee had actually received interest but did not disclose the same in the return of income. Cash system of accounting was accepted by the AO from A.Y. 2004-05 onwards. 16. We have considered the rival submission of the parties and gone through the orders of the authorities below. We have seen that during the assessment proceedings the assessee has accepted the error in calculating the interest on F.D. and the difference of Rs. 94,530/- was added ....