TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (1) TMI 1735
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he value of closing stock compared to opening stock, corresponding to increase in the balance of CENVAT / MODVAT credit has been paid before the due date of return of income prescribed u/s 139(1) of the Act and to make disallowance u/ s 43B to the extent of non-payment of the said sum, if any. The issue of any disallowance u/s 43B of the Act was never there before the CIT (A). Without issuing notice for enhancement as also show cause notice for before giving such directions, the direction to apply provisions u/s 43B of the Act is not legal and within jurisdiction of the CIT (A). 2. During the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings, the A.O. noticed that the assessee has not followed the prescribed method u/s. 145A of the Act in re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....r, the ld. CIT(A) after verifying the facts was of the opinion that there was an increase in balance of Cenvat/Modvat credit by Rs. 10,57,575/- which was the difference of the closing balance of Rs. 28,05,502/- and the opening balance of Rs. 17,47,987/-. The ld. CIT(A) was of the opinion that the A.O. should have disallowed this amount considering the provisions of section 43B of the Act in case such sum was not paid till the due date of the return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act. The ld. CIT(A) accordingly directed the A.O. to apply the provisions of section 43B of the Act and disallow an amount to the extent of non-payment till the due date of filing of the return of income u/s. 139(1) of the Act. 6. Before us, the ld. counsel for the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ind that this act of the First Appellate Authority is without notice and in contravention to the provisions of section 251(2) of the Act. In our considered view, any enhancement without notice and made in contravention to the provisions of section 251(2) of the Act violates the mandatory provisions of the act and cannot be upheld. We, therefore, set aside the findings of the ld. CIT(A) to this extent, the addition of Rs. 5,79,069/- stands deleted and the observations of the ld. CIT(A) qua the enhancement is struck down. Ground no. 1 is accordingly allowed. 2. The learned CIT (A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the disallowance of Rs. 13,533/- made in respect of insurance expenses on account of short....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....y the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of Nagri Mills Co. Ltd. 33 ITR 681 and the same reads as under:- "We have often wondered why the Income-tax authorities, in a matter such as this where the deduction is obviously a permissible deduction under the Income-tax Act, raise disputes as to the year in which the deduction should be allowed. The question as to the year in which a deduction is allowable may be material when the rate of tax chargeable on the assessee in two different years is different; but in the case of income of a company, tax is attracted at a uniform rate, and whether the deduction in respect of bonus was granted in the assessment year 1952-53 or in the assessment year corresponding to the accounting year 19....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the installation and/or labour charges. The A.O. was of the opinion that such plant and machineries cannot be installed without incurring any expenditure. The A.O. accordingly estimated 10% of the total additions and made an addition of Rs. 11,05,000/- u/s. 69C of the Act. 15. Assessee contested the addition before the ld. CIT(A). The ld. CIT(A) restricted the addition to the extent of 7% of the total additions and directed the A.O. to restrict the addition to Rs. 7,73,443/-. 16. Before us, the ld. counsel for the assessee stated that the A.O. has wrongly invoked the provisions of section 69C of the Act and the ld. CIT(A) further erred in part confirming the said addition. It is the say of the ld. counsel that section 69C provides for....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nditure or part thereof, or the explanation, if any, offered by him is not in the opinion of the [Assessing] Officer, satisfactory, the amount covered by such expenditure or part thereof, as the case may be, may be deemed to be the income of the assessee for such financial year:] [Provided that, notwithstanding anything contained in any other provision of this Act, such unexplained expenditure which is deemed to be the income of the assessee shall not be allowed as a deduction under any head of income]." 19. A perusal of the aforementioned section shows that the pre-requisite for invoking section 69C is that the assessee must have incurred some expenditure source of which is not explained or the explanation so furnished is not found to b....