Case Law Details
District Co-operative Central Bank Ltd. Vs ACIT (ITAT Bengalore)
Conclusion: Reassessment beyond four years was not valid in the absence of failure on part of assessee to fully and truly disclose all material facts necessary for assessment.
Held: Assessee claimed deduction of Rs.3,50,00,000/- u/s 36(1)(viia). However, assessee debited only Rs.3,00,00,000/- to the profit and loss account towards Provision for Bad and Doubtful Debts. Assessee considered Provision for Standard Assets of Rs.50.00,000/- also for claiming deduction u/s 36(1)(viia) which was not allowable. Hence, the deduction was excess claimed by Rs.50,00,000/-. Therefore, AO passed order under section 143 (3) read with section 147 by making the disallowances of Rs.50 Lacs. In the present facts of the case all the details available for identifying the details of deduction claimed under section 36(1)(viia) was available with AO during the course of original assessment proceedings. The reasons recorded also revealed that, there had been no new material available with AO which could justify the reopening of a concluded assessment beyond a period of 4 years. Respectfully following the decision in case of CIT vs Kelvinator India Ltd., the notice was set aside and assessment was quashed.
FULL TEXT OF THE ORDER OF ITAT BANGALORE
Present appeal has been filed by assessee against order dated 24/01/2019 passed by the Ld.CIT (A) Gulburg, for assessment year 2010-12 on following grounds of appeal:
Please become a Premium member. If you are already a Premium member, login here to access the full content.
Author Bio
