Calcutta HC dismisses
assessee’s appeal with costs for AY 2005-06, confirms addition based on the
balance-sheet and P&L account prepared for availing bank loan and certified
by Chartered Accountant in Form 3CB; Observes that the figures in audit report
in Form 3CB (issued in July, 2005) were at variance with actual audited balance
sheet and P&L account for the said period, notes that the difference
between the two was due to the over-valuation of the fixed assets for availing
of the bank loan; Assessee had argued that it is usual practice to draw up
accounts on the basis of estimates for the presentation to a bank at a time
prior to when the assessee is statutorily required to complete the annual
accounts and that addition cannot be made based on such estimated figures in
Form 3CB; Rejecting assessee’s stand, HC quashes the practice of
window-dressing of accounts for making it attractive for bankers and
subsequently removing the gloss and sheen at the time of paying taxes; HC
observes that certificate issued by the CA firm in Form 3CB purported to give
an impression that it was in exercise of an audit as required u/s 44AB (for
which Form 3CD is prescribed), however it was presented in a statutory form
with the fine print of paragraph 2(A) thereunder indicating that it was only an
estimate; HC remarks that “It is scarcely expected of a banker to question the
veracity of any accounts certified by a firm of chartered accountants or to
look into the fine print and comprehend therefrom that utterly bogus figures
had been furnished only for the purpose of availing of the credit facilities
from the bank.”; HC rules that “the balance-sheet and profit and loss accounts
of an assessee accompanied by a certificate as to its fairness, notwithstanding
the caveat as noticed in paragraph 2(A) thereof, cannot be tailor-made to suit
a particular purpose…”; Applies the doctrine of pari delicto to preclude the
assessee from detracting from the figures contained in the balance-sheet and
profit and loss accounts certified on July 18, 2005 at any subsequent stage;
Directs Registrar to forward the copy of this order to ICAI for appropriate
steps to be taken against the CA firm.:HC
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Can GST Under RCM Not Charged and Paid from FY 2017-18 to October 2024 be Settled in FY 2024-25?
In a recent and significant update to GST regulations, registered persons in India can now clear unpaid Reverse Charge Mechanism (RCM) liab...
-
Particulars in Part 1 and Part 2 of Step-2 of registration form are required to be exactly the same as reported in the TDS statement. Plea...
-
When India introduced the Goods and Services Tax (GST), it created a big change in the way companies handle their taxes. Earlier, business...
-
In this post, I will discuss Secretarial Standards related to Proxies under SS – 2. Right to Appoint: A Member entitled to attend and ...
-
What is a Digital Signature? Answer: A digital signature authenticates electronic documents in a similar manner a handwritten signatur...
-
Companies often give gifts to their employees to boost morale, celebrate achievements, and promote a positive work environment. Such gifts ...
-
LEASE-DEED (A brief Introduction) Lease defined. A lease of immovable property is a transfer of a right to enjoy such property, mad...
-
Section 150 of the Finance (No. 2) Act, 2024, specifies that taxpayers will not receive refunds for taxes paid or input tax credits (ITC) re...
-
Overview The Supreme Court of India recently ruled on the applicability of the Most Favoured Nation (MFN) clause in tax treaties involvin...
-
This Tax Alert summarizes the recent Delhi High Court (HC) ruling disposing Writ Petitions in a batch matter on valuation of import of serv...
No comments:
Post a Comment