AI Drafter - (New and Powerful) 
Generate professional replies, appeals, opinions to Show Cause Notices, assessment orders, audit objections, and other legal communications using TaxTMI's AI Drafter. 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (2) TMI 687
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....see was determined by the Assessing Officer at Rs. 216,51,50,570/- after making addition of Rs. 26,02,676/- on account of disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D. The record of the said assessment came to be examined by the concerned ld. Pr. CIT and on such examination, he was of the opinion that the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act suffered from the following errors:- i) The amount of Rs. 132.87 Crores was debited by the assessee company to the profit & loss account under the head 'current tax' but while computing the book profit u/s 115JB of the Act, the amount of Rs. 78,99,95,419/- only was added back under Explanation 1(a) to Section 115JB(2) of the Act, which was allowed by the Assessing Officer. ii) During the year under consideration, the assessee company had made donation of Rs. 6,88,66,033/- on which deduction u/s 80G was claimed but in the computation of total income, the sum of Rs. 5,25,31,000/- only was added back instead of Rs. 6,88,66,033/- which was allowed by the Assessing Officer. iii) The assessee company had claimed weighted deduction u/s35(1) of the Act @ 175% on contribution of Rs. 20,00,00,000/- made to M/s. Pushpaw....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....dit entitlement is an integral part of current year tax and hence Assessee Company has correctly reduced the same from provision for current tax to arrive provision for NET current tax Copy of relevant portion of Balance Sheet and Profit & Loss Account is enclosed herewith as Annexure '4'. It may kindly be noted the it is now well settled legal position that MAT credit entitlement is part of current tax and hence adjustment to be given as per explanation to section 115JB of the Act. The aforesaid issue that MAT credit entitlement should be reduced from Net Profit to Compute Book Profit u/s 115JB, is duly covered in your Assessee's own cases for AY 2012-13. AY 2013- 14 & AY 2014-15 wherein, on similar facts and circumstance, the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A)-15, Kolkata, has allowed the appeal of your appellant company. Copy of relevant portion of CIT (A)'s order for AY 2014-15 is enclosed herewith as Annexure '5'. It may kindly be further noted that the aforesaid issue that MAT credit entitlement should be reduced from Net Profit to Compute Book Profit u/s 115JB, is duly covered in JK Paper Ltd, i.e. your Assessee's group company&#....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,419/- in net profit to compute book profit u/S 115JB and hence order dt. 27/12/2018 passed u/s 143(3) by AO is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue. We therefore, request your goodself to kindly drop the proceedings u/s 263 of the Act. 2. Further the assessee company made donation of Rs. 688,66,033/- for claiming deduction of Rs. 354,33,017/-. in computation of total income, the assessee has added back Rs. 525,31,000/- instead of Rs. 688,66,033/- and in assessment order the AO allowed the same. Thus resulted in under assessment of total income to the tune of Rs. 163,35,033/-. In this connection, it is submitted respectfully that the order dt. 27/12/2018 passed u/s 143(3) by AO is neither erroneous nor prejudicial to the interest of revenue and while filing the Return of Income your Assessee Company had already added back Rs. 688,66,033/- for claiming deduction of Rs. 354,33, 017/-. Copy of Computation of Income is enclosed herewith as Annexure '1'. Details of donation made u/s 80G and corresponding donation expenses added back in computation of income are enclosed herewith as Annexure '8'. From perusal of aforesaid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....gainst Rs. 20 Crores alleged in impugned notice) to M/s Pushpawati Singhania Research Institute (PSRI), New Delhi and claimed weighted deduction @175% of Rs. 3.50 Crores. It may kindly be noted that PSRI is a medical research Institution and vide Notification dt. 12/04/2007, duly approved / notified u/s 35(1)(i) of the Act. Copy of Notification is enclosed herewith as Annexure '9'. Rule 5C of the Income Tax Rules defines the following guidelines, form and manner in respect of approval under clause (ii) and clause (ii) of sub-section (1) of section 35........ From perusal of aforesaid provisions, it may kindly be noted that in order to get the approval us 35(1)(ii), The applicant has to make an application in Form 3CF-II and after being convinced with the application filed, the Government of India grants approval and notified the applicant as eligible u/s 35(1) (ii). The said approval shall be valid for perpetual period unless the Central Government withdraw it. It will kindly be appreciated that there is no need to file application in Form 3CF -II every year. As per sub-rule (11) of Rule 5C, the Central Government may withdraw the approval granted under cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s found that the assessee company in its computation of total income has added back Rs. 78,99,95,419/- under explanation 1(a) to section 115JB(2) whereas an amount of Rs. 132.87 crores was debited to the profit & loss account under the head current tax. The AO should have added back Rs. 132.87 crores instead of Rs. 78.99,95,419/-. Hence, under assessment of Book profit of Rs. 53,87,04,581/- (Rs. 132,87,00,000/-(-) Rs. 78,99,95,419/-) is observed which having MAT effect of Rs. 11,49,68,176/-. Further the assessee company made donation of Rs. 6,88,66,033/- for claiming deduction of Rs. 3,54,33,017/-. In computation of total income the assessee has added back Rs. 5,25,31,000/- instead of Rs. 6,88,66,033/- and in the assessment order the AO allowed the same. Moreover the assessee company claimed weighted deduction u/s.35(1) of the I.T. Act, 1961 @175% on contribution of Rs. 2,00,00,000/- made to M/s. Pushpawati Singhania Research Institute, New Delhi. As per the provisions of Rule 5C & 5D of the Rules, the institution has to make an application in the prescribed form (Form-3CF-II) to the Central Govt. for its approval. However, in absence of required approval by the Central Govt. on re....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..../s 143(3), the ld. Counsel for the assessee invited our attention to the relevant details given at page no. 99 of the paper book to point out that out of the total donations of Rs. 6,88,66,033/- made by the assessee company during the year under consideration, the sum of Rs. 1,63,35,033/- was reflected under the head Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR). She submitted that the total amount spent by the assessee company on CSR during the year under consideration was Rs. 4,75,53,518/-. She then invited our attention to the computation of total income of the assessee company place at page no. 122 & 123 of the paper book to point out that both the amounts of donations and CSR expenditure to the tune of Rs. 5,25,31,000/- and Rs. 4,75,53,518/- were added back by the assessee company and there was thus no error in the order of the Assessing Officer passed u/s 143(3) on this issue also as allegedly pointed out by the ld. Pr. CIT. She contended that this position was very clear from the relevant details available on record before the Assessing Officer and since the entire amount of donation of Rs. 6,88,66,033/- was added back to the assessee company to the computation of total income, ther....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he impugned order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT passed u/s 263 of the Act, therefore, is not sustainable in law as well as in the facts of the case and the same is liable to be cancelled. 9. The ld. D/R strongly supported the order passed by the ld. Pr. CIT u/s 263. He contended that no enquiry or verification was made by the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings on all three issues pointed out by the ld. Pr. CIT in his impugned order and since the claim of the assessee on these three issues was accepted by the Assessing Officer in the assessment order completed u/s 143(3) of the Act without making such enquiry or verification which was called for in the facts and circumstances. It was a case of lack of enquiry and the order passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) was rightly set aside by the ld. Pr. CIT vide his impugned order passed u/s 263 by treating the same erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 10. We have heard the rival submission and also perused the relevant material available on record. In the present case the assessment order for the year under consideration was completed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Act vid....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
..... In the case of ITO vs D.G. Housing Project Ltd. 343 ITR 329 cited by the learned counsel for the assessee, Hon'ble Delhi High Court has held that in cases of wrong opinion or finding on merits, the CIT has to come to the conclusion and himself decide that the order is erroneous by conducting necessary enquiry, if required, before order under section 263 is passed. It was held that the CIT cannot remand the matter to the Assessing Officer to decide whether the findings recorded are erroneous. It was further held that in some cases, the CIT can also show and establish that the facts on record or inferences drawn from the facts on record per se justified and mandated further enquiry or investigation, but the Assessing Officer had erroneously not undertaken the same. However, the said finding must be clear, unambiguous and not debatable and the matter cannot be remitted for a fresh decision to the Assessing Officer to conduct further enquiries. It was held that in such matters, to remand the matter/issue to the Assessing Officer would imply and mean that the CIT has not examined and decided whether or not the order is erroneous but has directed the Assessing Officer to decide this as....