TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (4) TMI 298
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....pugned orders u/s 263 of the I.T. Act exercising his revision jurisdiction and thereby setting aside the orders of the Assessing Officer. 2. Since the facts and issue involved in both the appeals are identical, hence, these have been heard together and are being disposed of by this common order. ITA No. 668/Chd/2019 is taken as a lead case for narration of facts. ITA No. 668/Chd/2019 3. Brief facts of the case are that survey action u/s 133A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act') was conducted at the premises of the assessee on 14.3.2014 and during the course of survey, several discrepancies were noticed and confronted to the assessee but the assessee could not explain the source of investments viz. the excess cas....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....15BBE of the Act, without allowing any deduction in respect of any expenditure or allowance under any provisions of the I.T. Act, 1961. He, therefore, held that the order of the Assessing Officer was erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. The Ld. PCIT, therefore, invoking his jurisdiction u/s 263 of the Act and after giving opportunity to the assessee to explain the above, held the order of the Assessing Officer as erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. He, accordingly set aside the same with the direction to the Assessing Officer to make the assessment afresh after considering the issue as discussed by him in the impugned order. 4. Being aggrieved by the above order of the PCIT, the assessee....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ct is reproduced as under;- "Further, it is submitted that as per profit and loss submitted & produced before the Ld AO at the time of assessment, copy of which is also enclosed as per Annexure - II, If we go through the contents of the profit & loss account submitted during the assessment proceedings, in the credit side of profit and loss account, the assessee has shown the amount surrendered amounting to Rs. 95,00,000/- during the course of survey and offered for Tax. While arriving at the net profit, the assessee has claimed set off of current year depreciation amounting to Rs. 7,39,275/-against the income surrender during the course of survey amounting to Rs. 95,00,000/-. In this concern, your attention is invited to the provis....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the copy of the Income Tax Acknowledgment along with computation of profit & loss account of the assessee reveal that after claiming depreciation of Rs. 11,88,982/-, assessee had claimed the loss of Rs. 4,16,944/-. The assessee thereafter added the amount of Rs. 95 lacs surrendered income and after setting off of the loss of Rs. 4,16,944/-, the assessee declared net profit at Rs. 90,083,055/-. However, while computing the income as per the provisions of the Income Tax Act, the assessee added back the depreciation claimed of Rs. 11,88,982/- and thereafter claimed deduction of depreciation at Rs. 7,39,275/- (as admissible as per Income Tax Act) and after adding the interest income of Rs. 60,193/-, the total income was declared at Rs. 95....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f the Central Board of Direct Taxes(the Board) that in assessments prior to assessment year 2017-18, while some of the Assessing Officers have allowed set off of losses against the additions made by them under Section(s) 68/69/69A/69B/69C/69D, in some cases, set off of losses against the additions made under Section 115BBE(1) of the Act have not been allowed. As the amendment inserting the words 'or set off of any loss' is applicable with effect from 1st of April, 2017 and applies from assessment year 2017-18 onwards, conflicting views have been taken by the Assessing Officers in assessments for years prior to assessment year 2017-18. The matter has been referred to the Board so that a consistent approach is adopted by the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....bsp; Sd/- RajarajeswawR.) Under Secretary (ITA.II), CBDT" 9. Since the assessment year involved in the present case is assessment year 2014-15 and whereas the amended pr....