eng
competition

Text Practice Mode

सक्‍सेस विथ यू (Success with You) ~ म.प्र.हाईकोर्ट के जूनियर ज्‍यूडिशियल परीक्षा की तैयारी के लिए Success with you Application Install करें एवं You tube पर परीक्षाओं की तैयारी के लिए देखें । अधिक जानकारी के लिए कॉल करें 8839671701

created Oct 11th, 02:35 by Success With You


0


Rating

359 words
0 completed
00:00
  The Tribunal partly allowed the appeal by remanding the case back to the file of the assessing officer.  The assessing officer was directed to consider the assessee’s claim regarding the deduction of deferred revenue expenditure.  The respondent Department preferred an appeal before the High Court. By the impugned judgment, the High Court proceeded to set aside the order of the Tribunal on the ground that after the revised return was barred by time, there was no provision to consider the claim made by the appellant.  The learned counsel appearing for the appellant has taken us through the orders of the Tribunal and the High Court.  The learned counsel pointed out that the Tribunal did not direct consideration of the revised return but the Tribunal was rightly of the view that the assessing officer can consider claim made by the appellant regarding deduction of deferred revenue expenditure in accordance with law.  He submitted that the appellant was entitled to make a claim during the course of the assessment proceedings which otherwise was omitted to be specifically claimed in the return. He submitted that after the revised return was barred by limitation, there was no question of considering the claim for deduction made by the appellant in the revised return. He submitted that the High Court was absolutely correct in coming to the conclusion that after the revised return was barred by limitation, the assessing officer had no jurisdiction to consider the case of the appellant.  The learned ASG appearing for the department had faintly argued that since the appellant in its return had taken a conscious explicit plea with regard to the part of the claim being ascribable to capital expenditure and partly to revenue expenditure, it was not open for the appellant to plead for the first time before the ITAT that the entire claim must be treated as revenue expenditure. Further, it was not open to the ITAT to entertain such fresh claim for the first time. In this case, the Court did not consider the question of the power of the assessing officer to consider a claim made after a revised return was barred by time.

saving score / loading statistics ...