Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2010 (2) TMI AT This

  • Login
  • Cases Cited
  • Referred In
  • Summary

Forgot password       New User/ Regiser

⇒ Register to get Live Demo



 

2010 (2) TMI 1223 - AT - Income Tax

Issues Involved: Appeal by revenue against CIT(A) order u/s 143(3)/147 for A.Y. 2003-04 regarding deduction u/s 80HHC on DEPB amount. Assessee's cross objections challenging validity of reassessment proceedings u/s 147.

Deduction u/s 80HHC on DEPB Amount:
- Revenue appealed against CIT(A)'s decision allowing deduction u/s 80HHC on DEPB amounting to Rs. 45,366,592.
- Assessee challenged validity of reassessment proceedings initiated by AO u/s 147.
- Tribunal heard arguments from both sides and noted similar cases where the issue was addressed.
- Referring to a related case, the Tribunal decided to restore the matter back to the AO for fresh adjudication in light of a Special Bench decision.
- The Tribunal directed the AO to provide reasonable opportunities for the assessee to be heard during the fresh decision-making process.
- The issue of reassessment proceedings' validity was also to be decided by the AO based on a Supreme Court decision after considering the assessee's objections.
- Ultimately, the appeal by the revenue and cross objections by the assessee were treated as allowed for statistical purposes.

Conclusion:
- The Tribunal's decision, aligning with a previous order, emphasized the need for fresh adjudication by the AO regarding the deduction u/s 80HHC on DEPB amount and the validity of reassessment proceedings.
- The matter was to be handled with consideration of relevant legal precedents and ensuring the assessee's right to be heard during the process.
- The final ruling, treating both the revenue's appeal and the assessee's cross objections as allowed for statistical purposes, was pronounced in open court on 16th February 2010.

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates