9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (9) TMI 1024X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 80-IB - Held that:- None of the authorities below have placed on record, which condition laid down u/s 80IB has not been fulfilled by the assessee. Further, the ld. counsel for the assessee has submitted written submissions stating that the assessee has been allowed deduction u/s 80IB of the Act under the same conditions as in the preceding year and there was no change in the facts & circumstances in the preceding year. AO himself has mentioned with regard to claim of deduction under section 80IB being the 5th year of the business of the assessee and claim of deduction @ 100% under section 80IB was allowed. In the facts and circumstances and following the doctrine of consistency, the ld. CIT(A) is not justified in confirming the action of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -called bogus creditors and unexplained loans. There was no reason for sustaining the addition on account of these credits and the addition of ₹ 2,50,000/- and ₹ 3,32,580/- sustained by the Ld. CIT(A) in the name of Sh Ashok Sharma is very old one and there is no reasons for making the addition. As such, the addition confirmed may be deleted as this is old genuine loan. Similarly, the addition of ₹ 3,32,580/- should have been deleted. 4. That the Ld. CIT(A) should have allowed the deduction as claimed u/s 80IB of the Act at ₹ 20,81,705/- for which the assessee fulfilled all the conditions and was clearly entitled for deduction . Necessary evidence was duly filed before the authorities below who have failed to ap ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 55543 The AO disallowed 15% of the said expenses in the absence of books of account and vouchers vide para 3.1.2 of the order and also made similar addition on account of sundry creditors amounting to ₹ 3,32,580/- and ₹ 4.90 lakhs on account of unsecured loans in the absence of any explanation to the satisfaction of the A.O. 4. The Ld. CIT(A) deleted the addition of ₹ 2.40 lakhs out of income on account of unexplained unsecured loans amounting to ₹ 4.90 lakhs and confirmed the rest of the addition made by the A.O. 5. The Ld. counsel for the assessee, Mr. P.N.Arora, Advocate argued that no addition can be made without invoking the provisions of section 145(3) of the Act and additio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e action of the A.O. and considering the arguments of the ld. counsel for the assessee that a copy of Form 10CCB and copy of DIC certificate was submitted to the AO but the ld. CIT(A) observed that all the conditions laid down u/s 80IB of the Act are not fulfilled and merely filing of Form 10CCB and DIC certificate does not establish the claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act. 9. We have heard the rival contentions and perused the facts of the case. The onus is on the assessee to file Form 10CCB. It is a certificate duly certified by the CA and which has been submitted alongwith the return of income, is not under dispute . The DIC certificate was also submitted to the AO. These facts are not in dispute before the AO and as well as before ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
