2015 (11) TMI 1053 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction under section 10B denied - Held that - Before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals), the assessee has produced documents whatever documents he has produced before us in paper book. However, the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) declined to consider the same as there is no petition for admitting these as fresh evidence. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) failed to point out discrepancies to the assessee when it was filed as new evidence and he also refrained to consider the same. It would have been appropriate had he pointed out the discrepancies and given an opportunity to the assessee to file an application to admit fresh evidence. Instead of this, he outrightly dismissed the appeal of the assessee. Thus remit the entire issue back to the file of the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration as he had no occasion to consider the above documents as it was first time filed with the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Assessing Officer shall redecide the issue after giving adequate opportunity of hearing to the assessee. - Decided in favour of assessee for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal against denial of deduction under section 10B of the Income-tax Act, 1961.

Analysis:
1. The appeal concerned the denial of a deduction under section 10B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 for the assessment year 2011-12. The Assessing Officer had rejected the claim based on a decision of the Delhi High Court. The appellant contested this decision before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).

2. The appellant submitted evidence in the form of a letter from the Assistant Development Commissioner, which was deemed insufficient by the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The Commissioner held that the evidence did not meet the requirements set by the Delhi High Court in a previous case. Consequently, the Commissioner dismissed the appellant's claim for deduction under section 10B.

3. The appellant argued that the denial of the deduction was unjustified, emphasizing that the evidence provided was relevant and should have been considered. The appellant also highlighted discrepancies in the Commissioner's approach, stating that the Assessing Officer had granted the deduction for the preceding assessment year.

4. The Appellate Tribunal, after considering the arguments from both parties, found that the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) had erred in not allowing the evidence submitted by the appellant. The Tribunal noted that the Commissioner should have given the appellant an opportunity to address any discrepancies in the evidence. Therefore, the Tribunal remitted the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.

5. Ultimately, the appeal of the assessee was allowed for statistical purposes, indicating that the denial of the deduction under section 10B was set aside, and the issue was to be reconsidered by the Assessing Officer in light of the additional evidence provided by the appellant.

This detailed analysis of the judgment highlights the key legal arguments, evidentiary considerations, and the Tribunal's decision to remit the issue back to the Assessing Officer for fresh consideration.