2023 (3) TMI 322

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ant documents were produced before the Assessing Officer during the course of assessment proceedings without verifying the authenticity of the claim of the assessee ? (2) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the CIT (A), when the CIT (A) has admitted the additional evidence without affording opportunity to the Assessing Officer in violation of the Income Tax Rule 46A ? 2. Very briefly, the facts are that the respondent assessee, who is a leading printer in Sivakasi, filed its return of income on 28.09.2013, admitting ''Nil'' income, for the Assessment Year 2013-2014. The case was selected for scrutiny under CASS and a Notice under Section 143 ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....c. is Rs.76,14,663/-, which is the figure admitted in the ROI vide extract above, filed before Survey. There are separate P&L A/c for Bombay branch (loss at Rs.6,08,85,738), Head Office Sivakasi (profit at Rs.6,83,00,406) and consolidated P&L of both (NP at Rs.76,14,663) copies of which have all been filed both before A/O and at appellate stage. Thus, the NP as per impounded P&L A/c fully tallies with the NP shown against Sivakasi HO. 5.3. The mistake lies in not considering the Bombay branch loss and not fully perusing the consolidated P&L A/c. Therefore, there is no omission of any net profit as assumed by the learned A/O, who has considered the P&L A/c of Head Office only and the Bombay branch P&L A/c was omitted to be considere....