2012 (11) TMI 109 - AT - Income Tax

Rejection of appeal - treated as non-est as not signed in ink and the date was missing in the verification part of Form No. 35. - Held that - As decided in Cairn Energy India West BV Versus Additional Director of Income-tax, Ahmedabad 2010 (3) TMI 877 - ITAT AHMEDABAD that the assesses have removed defects by filing fresh memos. Also brief submission and affidavit duly signed by the authorized representative of the appellant company are filed . Appeal is remitted back to the file of CIT(A) to decide and adjudicate all the grounds of appeal as per law - in favour of assessee for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
1. Validity of the order of Ld. CIT(A) in dismissing the appeal on technical grounds.
2. Interpretation of Section 80IB(9) of the Income Tax Act regarding deduction eligibility for mineral oil (natural gas) production.
3. Allowance of provision for site restoration costs.
4. Set-off of brought forward assessed business loss and unabsorbed depreciation.

Issue 1: Validity of Ld. CIT(A) order:
The assessee appealed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) dismissing the appeal on technical grounds, citing issues with the appeal memo's signature and verification. The Ld. Authorized Representative argued that the case aligns with a previous decision by the Hon'ble Co-ordinate Bench, which allowed removal of defects through fresh memos. The Ld. CIT-D.R. supported the dismissal. The Tribunal found the Co-ordinate Bench's decision applicable, remitting the appeal back to Ld. CIT(A) for proper adjudication, emphasizing adherence to the law.

Issue 2: Interpretation of Section 80IB(9):
The appeal also addressed the interpretation of Section 80IB(9) concerning deduction eligibility for mineral oil (natural gas) production. The assessee contended that natural gas falls under "mineral oil," making it eligible for the deduction. Arguments were presented regarding the definition of mineral oil and the applicability of the deduction to the production of natural gas. The Tribunal directed a comprehensive review of the grounds of appeal by Ld. CIT(A) in line with legal provisions.

Issue 3: Allowance of site restoration costs:
Regarding the provision for site restoration costs, the dispute arose from the disallowance by the Ld. AO based on the nature of the costs as provisions and estimates. The assessee argued that the costs were ascertained liabilities based on contractual terms, ICAI guidelines, and accounting principles. The Tribunal stressed the recognition of site restoration as an ascertained liability and its inclusion in the computation of book profits under Section 115 JB of the Act.

Issue 4: Set-off of business loss and unabsorbed depreciation:
Lastly, the appeal sought the benefit of set-off for brought forward assessed business loss and unabsorbed depreciation. The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, implying a favorable outcome for the assessee concerning the set-off claim. The judgment emphasized the importance of proper adjudication and adherence to legal principles in tax matters.

This detailed summary provides a comprehensive analysis of the judgment, addressing each issue involved and highlighting the key arguments and decisions made by the Tribunal.