Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘D’ BENCH: CHENNAI
Before: SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, HON’BLE & SHRI ANIKESH BANERJEE
आदेश / O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: This appeal filed by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai, dated 10.11.2017 and pertains to assessment year 2006-07.
The assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
The order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-13, Chennai, dismissing the grounds of appeal
on the issue of re-opening of assessment is against the provisions of law and contrary to the facts and circumstances of the case.
2. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is not justified in upholding the re-opening of assessment beyond four years from the end of the assessment year. The claim of deduction in respect of withdrawal of provisions credited to P &. L A/c aggregating to Rs.26,33,966/- (Provision for interest accrued on inter-corporate deposits Rs.16,08,434/-, provision for NPAs under Housing Loans Rs.9,78,812/-, provision for diminution in value of investments Rs.46,720/-) have been clearly disclosed in the audited financials filed with the Assessing Officer and with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).
3. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ought to have held that the reversal of provisions claimed as deductions have been overlooked by the Assessing Officer and ought to have been allowed to be deducted. For these reasons and for any other reason that may be adduced at the time of hearing, it is prayed that the Hon'ble Tribunal may be pleased to allow the appeal.
3. The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of housing finance, filed its return of income for the AY 2006-07 on 02.11.2006 declaring loss of Rs.2,65,06,199/-. The case was subsequently reopened u/s.147 of the Act and the assessment has been completed u/s.143(3) r.w.s.147 of the Act, by making additions towards disallowance of provision withdrawn of Rs.26,33,966/-.
4. The assessee carried the matter before the Ld.CIT(A). Before the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee reiterated its arguments taken before the AO and argued that it has reconciled the provision withdrawn and credited to P&L A/c by taking into account the amount of disallowance made in earlier years. The Ld.CIT(A) after considering the relevant submissions of the assessee and also taken note of various facts, dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee and sustained the additions made towards disallowance of provision withdrawn by holding that the assessee in not able to furnish any proof for provision for contingency, which has been reversed under various heads in the years of creation of provision.
Being aggrieved by the order of the Ld.CIT(A), the assessee in in appeal before us.
The Ld.AR for the assessee, at the time of hearing, submitted that the assessee has filed certain additional evidences to justify its claim of withdrawal of provision, created for contingencies and the additional evidences were not filed before the AO. Therefore, one more opportunity of hearing may be given to the assessee to justify its case.
The Ld.DR, on the other hand, supporting the order of the Ld.CIT(A), fairly agreed that the issue may be set aside to the file of the AO to give another opportunity of hearing to the assessee.
We have heard both the parties, perused the materials available on record and gone through orders of the authorities below. The AO has made additions towards disallowance of provision withdrawn on the ground that the assessee could not establish the disallowance made in the earlier years towards provision of contingency withdrawn and credited to P&L A/c for the impugned assessment years. The assessee claimed that it could not file necessary details before the AO, however, it has gathered additional evidences and the same can be verified by the AO. Therefore, considering the fact that the assessee has filed certain additional evidences to justify its case and further, the same were not filed before the AO, we are of the considered view that the issue needs to go back to the file of the AO for fresh examination of the claim of the assessee in light of various evidences.
Hence, we set aside the appeal to the file of the AO and direct the AO to re-consider the issue in light of various evidences filed by the assessee in accordance with law.
In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced on the 16th day of March, 2022, in Chennai.