AI Drafter 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 1577
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eciating that tax return should be processed on the face value and with the information given in the return without touching upon the debatable issues. 3. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in upholding the action of Assessing officer by not appreciating that appellant has started "new business" of trading of CER w.e.f. March, 2006 and also that appellant has promptly complied the provisions of advance tax by depositing the tax payable before the close of the financial year. 4. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has erred in upholding the action of Assessing officer that before charging interest under section 234C the assessee must be fastened with the liability to pay advance tax under section 208, Based on the facts of the case, appellant could not be made liable for paying advance tax and as a result, case of the appellant fell beyond ken of section 208 of the Income-tax Act, 1961. 5. That the aforesaid grounds are independent and without prejudice to each other. 3. The assessee has raised the following gro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....f appeal at any time before or during the hearing of this appeal," ITA No. 4455/del/2009 by Assessee & ITA NO 4853/Del/2009 by Revenue Against order of AO u/s 143(3) of the act 5. Assessee is a limited company who filed its return of income on 30/11/2006 showing income of Rs. 1 279349010/- which was processed under section 143 (1) on 31/03/2008. Subsequently, assessee filed revised return of income on 31/03/2008 showing income of Rs. 1266091510/-. Assessee Company is engaged in business of industrial synthetics business wherein it manufactures nylon tyre cord fabric, industrial fabric business where it manufactures quilting fabrics, chemical business where it produces Flourochemicals and chloromethane and packaging film business where it manufactures packaging films. Several additions were made to the total income of the assessee amounting in all to Rs. 38298765/- and taxable income of the assessee was determined at Rs. 1304390275/- against returned income of Rs. 1266091510/-. Assessee, aggrieved with the order of the Ld. assessing officer preferred an appeal before the Ld. CIT (A) who passed an order dated 13/ 8/2010 confirming certain disallowance/additions and deleting cer....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....peal before us. Therefore, no disallowance under section 14 A of the income tax act can be made in the hands of the assessee for this assessment year based on computation formula of rule 8D. The second contention of the assessee is that the Ld. assessing officer has not recorded any satisfaction where the assessee has contended that assessee has not incurred any expenditure for earning exempt income. The detailed exploration of the assessee is available at Para No. 7.2 of assessment order where assessee has submitted that out of the total investment, Rs. 8756.86 Lacs are invested in foreign subsidiary company where dividend earned by the company is taxable and not exempt. Furthermore, it was also contended that investment made during the year is out of operating cash flow of the current year and the remaining investment of Rs. 1096.7 Lacs had been made earlier in different financial year, to substantiate assessee also submitted the cash flow statement. Therefore, it was the contention of the assessee that it has not incurred any interest expenditure on the investment made. However, without rejecting the explanation of the assessee and recording an objective satisfaction on examinat....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....aimed the amount of provision written back of Rs. 11428464/- while computing the taxable income as per returned income revised as well as original. The said amount has already been disallowed in the year in which provision was created therefore, the provisions written back cannot be charged to tax. It was further stated that the above amount is allowable while computing the taxable income as It was not claimed in the income tax return originally due to inadvertence. Such claim was not accepted by the Ld. assessing officer as according to him, even in the revised return filed by the assessee on 31/03/2008 this was not claimed. He further referred to the decision of Hon‟ble Supreme Court in case of Goetz India Ltd versus CIT 284 ITR 323 and submitted that no such claim can be entertained by him without their being revised return. The assessee contested the above finding of the Ld. AO before the Ld. CIT appeal who also rejected the claim of the assessee stating that the appellate authorities can only entertain a question of law and thus the claim, which has not been made before the assessing officer through a revised return cannot also be entertained at the appellate stage. Aggr....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....n such claim. In view of this we set aside this ground of appeal to the file of the Ld. CIT (A) to examine whether the provisions no longer written back can be charged to income tax in spite of the claim of the assessee that no deduction of such sum has been allowed in the earlier years. In the result ground No. 5 of the appeal of the assessee is allowed with above directions. 14. The assessee has further moved the additional ground of appeal along with application under rule 11 of the income tax appellate tribunal rules, 1963 for admission of the same. The application of the assessee says that assessee has received carbon emission reduction certificates in terms of Kyoto protocol and has transferred 14 Lacs such certificates for Rs. 93.85 crores that are shown in the profit and loss account. The claim of the assessee is that such income is not chargeable to tax, which was originally not claimed. Therefore, appellant raised the additional ground that the amount received on transfer of such certificate was a capital receipt not liable to tax under the provisions of the income tax act. He submitted that this is illegal ground, which can be raised at any time by the assessee, and i....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s remitted back to the file of the Ld. assessing officer to decide it in accordance with the law, after granting reasonable opportunity of hearing to the assessee. 17. In the result appeal of the assessee is allowed accordingly for statistical purposes. 18. Now we come to the appeal of the revenue. The 1st ground of appeal is against the finding of the Ld. CIT appeal to the Ld. assessing officer wherein he has directed the Ld. AO to recompute the disallowance under section 14 A of the Act as per rule 8D after reducing the financial charges from the interest considered in the assessment order and not to reduce current liabilities the total assets for the purpose of calculating disallowance under rule 8D. The claim of the revenue is that the Ld. assessing officer has correctly computed the disallowance applying the provisions of rule 8D of the act. The above issue has already been decided by us while deciding the ground No. 1 to 4 of the appeal of the assessee wherein we have deleted the disallowance made by the Ld. assessing officer in absence of any positive satisfaction as required under the provisions of section 14 A (2) of the income tax act and also holding that the provi....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... result ground No. 2 of the appeal of the revenue is dismissed. 22. In the result appeal of the revenue is dismissed. ITA No. 2181/del/2009 by Assessee Against intimation u/s 143(1) of the act 23. This appeal is preferred by assessee against the order of Ld. CIT (A) - XII, New Delhi dated 13/03/2009 wherein he has upheld the chargeability of interest under section 234C of the income tax act. The brief facts involved in this appeal is that for assessment year 2006 - 07 assessee has filed its return of income on 30/11/2000 showing total income of Rs. 127,93,49,009/-and on which intimation under section 143 (1) of the income tax act, 1961, was passed on 01/03/2008. According to that intimation the interest under section 234C of Rs. 12671350/- was charged. Assessee was aggrieved with the intimation, preferred an appeal before Ld. CIT (A) contending that assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of nylon industrial yarn, tyre cord fabrics, polyester films etc and during the year assessee has earned income on trading of CER, which is a new source of income. Therefore, the plea of the assessee was that as it is not a normal business activity provision of section....