2022 (1) TMI 1189

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....o not emerge from the Order giving effect to CIT(A)‟s Order. ((i) National Thermal Power Company Limited v CIT (1998) 2 229 ITR (383 (SC) (ii) CIT vs. Kanpur Cool | Syndicate (1 964) 53 ITR 225 (SC) (iii) Prithvi Brokers and Shareholders P.Ltd. 349 ITR 336 . (Bom) &) Circular No. 14 (XI-35) of 1955 dated : April 11, 1955). 3. The Learned CIT(A) erred in stating that the addition made w/s.115JB had attained finality and the same cannot be adjudicated in the proceedings before the e CIT(A) overlooking that as per original Assessment Order dated 24.12.2010 the tax was charged a as per the regular provisions of Income-tax Act and not on income under "Section 115JB and therefore Appellant did not raise the grounds against computation. "under Section 115JB and the Appellant is entitled to raise grounds against computation made u/s. 115JB in_ original Assessment Order dated 24.12.2010 when the claims were made in Return of Income filed. 4. The Learned CIT(A) erred in not considering the submissions of the Assessee wherein it was stated by the Assessee that the grounds of appeal raised before the CIT A) were covered i in favour of the Assessee in i....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....A) has erred in not considering the judgement of Hon‟ble Mumbai ITAT in the case of Varus Shipping Co. Ltd. 17 ITR (Trib) 587 wherein it has been held that the provisions of Section 14A are not applicable to Tonnage Tax companies computing tax under Chapter XIIG of the Act, which provisions are applicable to Appellant Company and therefore Section 14A is not applicable to Appellant Company. 10. The Learned CIT(A) has erred confirming charging interest of Rs. 22,75,608/u/s.234B and Rs. 16,28,485/w/s.234D. 11. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in charging interest of Rs. 11,36,956/w/s.220(2) overlooking that original amount of tax payable amounting to Rs. 50,56,908/.. (Rs. 4,82,19,713/less Rs. 4,31,62,805/-) was adjusted against refunds of Rs. 5,91,53,202/and therefore the Appellant was not. entitled to pay interest w/s.220(2) and further erred in overlooking that no interest was charged u/s 220(2) in the original assessment order and therefore the same cannot be charged in the Order giving appeal effect. 12. The Learned CIT(A) has erred in adjusting demand for Assessment Year 2008-09 without providing the date of adjustment c and not supplying the challan....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... by the Ld. First Appellate Authority in respect of income under regular provisions of the Act. Since, there the additions made under the MAT provisions were not challenged by the assessee before the Ld. First Appellate Authority, therefore, he retained the income computed under MAT provisions in the assessment order. Aggrieved by the order dated 27/02/2012 of the Assessing Officer giving effect to the order of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, the assessee preferred appeal before the Ld. CIT(A). The Ld. CIT(A) dismissed the grounds taken in the appeal filed before him on the ground that same do not arise from the order dated 27/02/ 2012 of the Assessing Officer. The relevant finding of the Ld. CIT(A) is reproduced as under: "....................From the above, it can be seen that the computation of income u/s. 115JB was part of original Assessment Order. As the same was not challenged in the appeal filed against the assessment order. The same attained finality. In the current order giving effect to CIT Appeal‟s order. Assessing Officer computed tax on normal income as it was less than the tax computed u/s 115JB in the original Assessment Order. The Assessi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ssible terms. The purpose of the assessment proceedings before the taxing authorities is to assess correctly the tax liability of an assessee in accordance with law. If, for example, as a result of a judicial decision given while the appeal is pending before the Tribunal, it is found that a non-taxable item is taxed or a permissible deduction is denied, there is no reason why the assessee should be prevented from raising that question before the Tribunal for the first time, so long as the relevant facts are on record in respect of the item. There is no reason to restrict the power of the Tribunal under section 254 only to decide the grounds which arise from the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). Both the assessee as well as the Department have a right to file an appeal/cross-objections before the Tribunal. The Tribunal should not be prevented from considering questions of law arising in assessment proceedings, although not raised earlier. The view that the Tribunal is confined only to issues arising out of the appeal before the Commissioner (Appeals) is too narrow a view to take of the powers of the Tribunal. Undoubtedly, the. Tribunal has the discretion to....