TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2022 (7) TMI 430
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the above captioned three appeals, we proceed to dispose of the same by this common order. 3. For the sake of convenience and clarity, the facts relevant to the appeal in ITA No. 80/PUN/2018 for the assessment year 2012-13 are stated herein. 4. The appellant raised the following grounds of appeal:- "1] The learned CIT(A) erred in confirming the action of the learned A.O. in making an addition of Rs. 6,47,41,354/- to the book profit computed u/s. 115JB of the Act. 2] The learned CIT(A) erred in rejecting the profit and loss account and the balance sheet prepared by the appellant company for the purposes of Income Tax Act by incorporating the provision for liability on account of additional cane price declared and pai....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as applicable for the current asst. year and accordingly, in view of the said proviso, the appellant company was permitted to prepare a separate profit and loss account for the purposes of Income Tax Act vis-avis the profit and loss account placed before the AGM. 7] The learned CIT(A) erred in not appreciating that for the earlier years, the appellant had prepared separate profit and loss account for the purposes of Income Tax Act and determination of book profit u/s. 115JB which was accepted by the A.O. and therefore, there was no reason to reject the same in the current year. 8] The appellant craves leave to add, alter, amend or delete any of the above grounds of appeal." 5. Briefly, the facts of the case are as under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....was decided to pay an additional cane price of Rs. 175/- per MT and accordingly, additional cane price was made in the books of accounts of Rs. 29,00,02,398/- maintained for the next financial year i.e. F.Y. 2012-13. However, for the purpose of Income Tax Act, the provision created towards additional cane price of Rs. 29,00,02,398/- was claimed, which was allowed under the normal provisions of the I.T. Act. Even for the purpose of computing the tax liability under the provisions of section 115JB of the Act, the Profit & Loss Account, Balance Sheet were re-cast by including liability towards additional cane price. The Assessing Officer disallowed the said claim by holding that re-cast the Profit & Loss Account and Balance Sheet are not in ac....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the purpose of Income Tax Act had also adopted the same Accounting Policies and Accounting Standards adopted for the preparation of the Profit & Loss Account and Balance Sheet for the purpose of Companies Act. Finally, he submitted that in the earlier years, similar claim was came to be allowed by the Assessing Officer and also for subsequent assessment years 2016-17. Therefore, in the absence of any change in the facts and law, the claim of the assessee should be allowed on the principle of consistency. In support of proposition, he placed reliance on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Radhasoami Satsang vs. CIT, 193 ITR 321 (SC). 9. On the other hand, Ld. CIT-DR placed reliance on the order of the Ld. CIT(A) ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....g Policies and Accounting Standards, adopted for preparing the annual accounts for the purpose of Companies Act as laid before the AGM in accordance with the provisions of the Companies Act. It is further provided that in case where the company had adopted a financial year under the Companies Act, which is different from the previous year for the purpose of Income Tax Act, the same Accounting Policies and Accounting Standards which are adopted for the purpose of preparing annual accounts under the Companies Act shall be adopted. This would clearly show the Legislative intent that while preparing the annual accounts for the purpose of Income Tax Act and the Companies Act, there should not be any difference in the Accounting Policies and Acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Polices and Accounting Standards which are adopted in the former set of annual accounts. Therefore, the second set of annual accounts cannot be adopted for the purpose of computing the tax liability under the provisions of section 115JB of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer had rightly rejected second set of annual accounts prepared by the appellant company for the purpose of computing the tax liability u/s. 115JB of the Act. Therefore, we do not see any reasons to interfere with the orders of the lower authorities. As regards to the other argument relating to the 'principle of consistency', we are of the considered opinion that the principle of res-judicata, has no application in the income-tax proceedings. The principle....