TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 668
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of Income-tax [Appeals]-6, Bengaluru, in so far as it is against the Appellant, is opposed to the law, weight of evidence, probabilities, facts and circumstances in the appellant's case. 2. The appellant denies itself liable to be taxed on total income determined by the learned authorities below amounting toRs. 1,02,04,007/- as against the revised income being business loss reported by the appellant of Rs. 63,90,894/-, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 3.1 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] is not justified in confirming the addition made by the learned assessing officer amounting to Rs. 64,12,499/-being the disallowance made on account of bad debts claimed by the appellant, on the facts and ci....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The authorities below ought to have appreciated that consent does not confer jurisdiction and taxes are to paid in accordance with the scheme of the act and no tax can be collected without the authority of law, on the facts and circumstances of the case. 4.1 The learned Commissioner of Income-tax [Appeals] failed to appreciate that the learned assessing officer for the purposes of computing the total assessed income of the appellant in the computation has considered the income declared by the appellant in its original return of income of Rs. 31,46,610/-instead of considering the revised total income declared by the appellant in the valid revised return of income in whichrevisedbusinesslossamountingtoRs. 63,90,894/- was declared by ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ivil construction filed its return of income for assessment year 2014-15 on 27.11.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 31,46,610/- and the same has been subsequently revised on 31.10.205 declaring a loss of Rs. 63,90,894/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and during the course of assessment proceedings, the A.O. noticed that the assessee has debited a sum of Rs. 64,12,499/- under the head "bad debts" and accordingly called upon the assessee to file necessary evidences including justification for claim of bad debts. In response, the assessee submitted that it has filed revised return rectifying the mistake in offering income on percentage completion method on advances received from customers and also accounting advances received from cus....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ons of the assessee noted that although the assessee claims to have debited bad debt account on the basis of confirmations of debtor, but fact remains that as per ledger extract furnished by the assessee of the Trust it was noticed that there is a credit balance of Rs. 83 lakhs. This means the accounts of the Trust was in credit as on 1st day of the financial year and before write off of bad debts and become credit of Rs. 83 lakhs due to write off. This leads to the impression that write off was a stop gap arrangement to reduce taxable income for the current assessment years. Therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) opined that there is no error in the findings recorded by the Ld. AO to disallow bad debt claim of the assessee. Aggrieved by the CIT(A)'s or....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... in all fairness, the issue needs to be set aside to the file of A.O. to verify the facts and to decide the issue in accordance with law. 6. The Ld. D.R. for the revenue on the other hand strongly supporting order of the CIT(A) submitted that the A.O. as well as the Ld. CIT(A) had recorded categorical finding in the light of various details filed by the assessee and also on the basis of admission of authorised representative for the assessee before the A.O. that amount debited to bad debt account is in fact income of the assessee. Therefore, there is no reason to take different view at this point of time. However, he fairly admitted that the issue may be set aside to the file of the A.O. to look into the arguments of the assessee in t....