TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (10) TMI 374
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he material brought on record. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of Rs. 1,72,92,000/- made on account of income from other sources, without properly appreciating the facts of the case and the material brought on record. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. It is, therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer may be restored to the above extent. 5. The appellant craves leave to amend or alter any ground or add a new." C.O. No. 13/Ahd/2016 filed by assessee (A.Y. 2012-13) "1. In law and in the facts and circumstances of the respondent's case the learned CITIA) has grossly erred in dismissing Ground No. 1 of the respondent's appeal challenging the validity of the assessment order impugned before him. 2 In law and in the facts and circumstances of the respondent's case the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in sustaining the addition of Rs. 6,02,985 (out of the addition of Rs 1,78,94,985 made by the learned Assessing Officer u/s. 68 of the Income-tax Act, 1961) on the ground t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ondent's case, the learned CIT(A) has grossly erred in dismissing Ground No 8 of the respondent's appeal before him on the ground that levy of interest u/s 234B, 234D and 234A was mandatory. He ought to have appreciated. inter alia, that the respondent had challenged the very levy of interest under those provisions and, in the peculiar facts and circumstances of its case, even if the additions to its returned income came to be ultimately sustained, the ratio of the decision of the Gujarat High Court in Bharat Machinery and Hardware Mart's case (136 ITR 875) and of the decision of the ITAT Delhi Bench in Haryana Warehousing Corporation v DCIT 1252 ITR (AT) 34] was attracted and the levy deserved to be cancelled. 7. The respondent craves leave to add, amend and/or alter the ground or grounds of Cross-objections either before or at the time of hearing." Additional Grounds of C.O. filed by the assessee "Appellant craves leave to raise this additional ground of appeal before the Hon'ble ITAT. This is a legal ground and therefore as per the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of National Thermal Power (229 ITR 383) it can be raised before the Hon'b....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....resents part of sale of teak trees and same does not represent any taxable income of Appellant Company. 5. The appellant craves leave to add to, alter, amend and/or withdraw any ground or grounds of appeal either before or during the course of hearing of the appeal." 3. We are taking up ITA 3655/Ahd/2015 for assessment year 2012-13 filed by the Revenue. 4. Return of income was filed on 21-09-2012 declaring total income at Rs. Nil. The return was processed u/s. 143(1) and subsequently notice u/s. 143(2) of the Act was issued and served on the assessee. In response to the notices, the Authorized Representative and Chartered Accountant of the assessee company attended the hearing from time to time and furnished written submissions. The Assessing Officer observed that during the course of assessment proceedings, the assessee's audited accounts were called for the year under consideration which were filed by the assessee company except tax audit report which was not obtained since the company had reported no receipt of income in its profit and loss account for the year under consideration. The Assessing Officer observed that the assessee company had shown outstanding liability under....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....Rs. 4.5 crores and against the aforesaid sale proceeds, the assessee has shown cost per plant at Rs. 548 per tree on the basis of cost capitalized under the head capital WIP per plantation of the agricultural operation at Rs. 7,17,55,896/- and capital purchase expenses at Rs. 1,33,21,402/- totaling to Rs. 8,50,77,298/- for 1,55,131 teak trees as per insurance policy. The sale cost per teak tree is not verifiable in absence of any supporting evidence filed by the assessee and sales estimates at Rs. 330 per teak tree being 60% of cost per tree claimed by the assessee. 7. The ld. Authorized Representative relied upon the order of the CIT(A). 8. We have heard both the sides and perused all the relevant materials available on record. The finding given by the ld. CIT(A) that the entire teak trees were sold during the year appears to be correct and the contention of the ld. Departmental Representative that the documents were not provided based on the assessment order is not supported by the findings given by the CIT(A) as well as the submissions made by the assessee during the assessment proceedings. There is no discrepancy as such pointed out by the Assessing Officer related to the val....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wance of Rs. 1,72,92,000/- made on account of income from other sources is based on the details given by the assessee not only before the CIT(A) as well as before the Assessing Officer as well. There is no reasoning given for rejecting the books of account and tax treatment given by the assessee company. In fact, no discrepancy has been pointed out by the Assessing Officer by rejecting the same. The assessee has given a reconciled order identification vis-à-vis the original agreements made to the purchase and sale of teak tree during the year through various documents including the scheme as well as the summary of capital work in progress, allotment letters given to member along with the sampling certificate, register, showing money received from members permission received from tax department for sale of teak trees and all the relevant documents related to the same. Therefore, the CIT(A) has rightly deleted the said addition in respect of amount credited in bank account. Thus, Ground No. 2 of revenue's appeal is dismissed. 12. As relates to cross objection filed by the assessee, ground nos. 1 and 4 to 7 as well as additional grounds are related to challenging the validity ....