2016 (3) TMI 1470 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance of the benefit u/s 80P(2) (d) - CIT(A) allowed deductio 2014 (9) TMI 1280 - ITAT JODHPUR n - HELD THAT - As it is noticed that the learned CIT (A) has followed judicial discipline by deleting the disallowance by following the decision of the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee s own case for the immediately preceding year 2014 (9) TMI 1280 - ITAT JODHPUR and as the Revenue has not been able to show any distinguishable facts, we are of the view that the finding of the learned CIT (A) is on right footing and does not call for any interference. As a result ground No.1 in both the Revenue s appeal stands dismissed. Leave encashment claimed u/s 43B - CIT (A) has deleted the same by applying the proviso to Section 43B of the Act as the said amount had been paid before the due date applicable for filing the return of income under Sub Section (1) of Section 139 of the Act in respect of the previous year in which the liability to pay such sum was incurred. The Revenue has not been able to dislodge this finding of the learned CIT (A) and consequently we are of the view that the findings of the learned CIT (A) on these issues are also on right footing and do not call for any interference. Both the appeal of the Revenue stands dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
- Appeal filed by Revenue against CIT (A) order for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12.
- Deletion of addition made on account of disallowance u/s 80P(2) (d) of the IT Act.
- Deletion of addition made on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80P and other claims.

Analysis:
1. The appeal filed by the Revenue was against the CIT (A) order for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. The primary issue in the appeal for 2010-11 was the deletion of the addition made on account of disallowance u/s 80P(2) (d) of the IT Act. Similarly, for 2011-12, the Revenue challenged the deletion of the addition made on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80P, along with the deletion of disallowance made on account of arrear award and leave encashment claimed by the assessee u/s 43B of the Act.

2. The learned DR representing the Revenue argued that the assessee was not entitled to the deductions under the relevant sections and that the CIT (A) erred in granting relief. The DR supported the AO's order and contended that the CIT (A) should not have deleted the additions.

3. Upon review, the Tribunal found that the CIT (A) had followed the decision of a co-ordinate Bench in the assessee's own case for the preceding year, where the disallowance was deleted. The Tribunal noted that the CIT (A) maintained judicial discipline by following the earlier decision. Since the Revenue failed to provide any distinguishable facts, the Tribunal upheld the CIT (A)'s decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeal for both assessment years.

4. Regarding the disallowance of arrear award and leave encashment in the appeal for 2011-12, the Tribunal observed that the CIT (A) had correctly applied the proviso to Section 43B of the Act. The CIT (A) had ruled in favor of the assessee as the amounts were paid before the due date for filing the return of income. The Tribunal found no reason to interfere with the CIT (A)'s findings on these issues, leading to the dismissal of the Revenue's appeal for both assessment years.

5. In conclusion, the Tribunal dismissed both appeals of the Revenue, upholding the CIT (A)'s decisions on the issues of disallowances under various sections of the IT Act. The order was pronounced in open court on 14.03.2016.