2018 (2) TMI 765

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....r is a company registered under the Companies Act and is engaged in the business of manufacturing edible oils and its byeproducts. A survey under section 133A of the Act was carried out at the premises of the company on 11.10.2012. During the course of such survey, the statement of one Kailash Shah, Director of the Company was recorded, in which, he disclosed an unaccounted income of Rs. 2.62 crores (rounded off) during the assessment year 2013-14. In the return of income that the company filed for the said assessment year 2013-14, the company declared a total income of Rs. 3.03 crores (rounded off) which included the said income of Rs. 2.62 crores disclosed during the survey. 4. While the assessment of the petitioner's return for the ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... filed a revised return. 7. The assessee thereupon approached the Commissioner of Income Tax by filing a revision petition under section 264 of the Act and took up the issue of the said sum of Rs. 44.80 lakhs to be taxed twice. To this extent, he challenged the order of assessment for the assessment year 2013-14. 8. During the hearing of the revision petition, the Commissioner also called for the remarks of the Assessing Officer. Such remarks were offered under a communication dated 15.03.2017, in which, the Assessing Officer conveyed as under: "2. In this connection, vide letter of even number dated 16/02/2017 the undersigned was directed to submit report on the assessee's application u/s 264 of the income Tax Act made before your ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Assessing Officer agreed to the petitioner's suggestion that the said sum of Rs. 44.80 lakhs form part of the larger disclosure of Rs. 2.62 lakhs made by the assessee for the assessment year 2013-14 and which sum of Rs. 44.80 lakhs was shifted to the assessment year 2012-13 for taxing purpose. On the basis of such factual position, the assessee contended before the Commissioner that not reducing the assessee's income by Rs. 44.80 lakhs for the assessment year 2013-14 would amount to double taxation. Same income was being taxed twice. Despite clear position as admitted by the Assessing Officer in the said communication dated 15.03.2017, the Commissioner dismissed the Revision Petition on the ground that the assessee could have filed....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Not making deductions in the assessment year 2013-14 on the ground that the assessee had not filed revised return would also be too technical. When the assessee's return was being finalized for the assessment year 2012-13, he had offered the said income of Rs. 44.80 lakhs to tax on the basis that the said income would be reduced from the return for the assessment year 2013-14. The Assessing Officer could not have accepted one part of the assessee's offer while rejecting later. Consensus of the assessee was conditional viz. that the income may be taxed for the assessment year 2012-13 but must be released from consideration of the assessee's income for the assessment year 2013-14. The Assessing Officer acted only one part of the o....