TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
1982 (10) TMI 64
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....rofits, and debited the same at two places in the profit & Loss Account. At one place, the assessee debited the provision for the current year amounting to Rs. 30,000 and further in the profit & Loss Account it debited the balance sum of Rs. 1,70,000 as provision for gratuity for the earlier years. The ITO completed the assessment originally by adding back the sum of the Rs. 1,70,000 only. In the original assessment, the ITO did not add back the sum of Rs. 30,000 which was also a provision for gratuity and which, on a parity of reasoning, should also have been added back just like the other sum of Rs. 1,70,000. Subsequently the audit party examined the records and pointed out to the ITO that the sum of Rs. 30,000 should have been added back....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... was held that the audit party was not empowered to interpret the law and so their interpretation of the law in a particular way could not constitute "information" under s. 147(b). However, the audit party can point out a factual matter leading to the conclusion that income has been under assessed, and such an opinion coming from the audit party would definitely constitute "information" even on the authority of Indian & Eastern Newspapers Society. He urged that the order of the CIT(A) deserved to be vacated and that of the ITO deserved to be restored. 4. Shri S.P. Mehta, the ld. counsel for the assessee, on the other hand, supported the order of the CIT(A). He stated that two conditions must be satisfied before s. 147(b) could be pressed ....