9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (6) TMI 582X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... T. The specific issue which remained to be decided was whether various conditions as specified in section 32A(6) and the section 32A(4), 32A(3) as referred in section 32A(6) of the Act are fulfilled in the appellant s case. The appellant has elaborately shown that the conditions specified in section 32A(6) of the Act are fulfilled by it. Therefore, the claim of the appellant is fully justified. Revenue has failed to controvert the findings of the CIT(A). Once the assessee has fulfilled the conditions of section 32A(6) of the Act, the claim merits to be allowed in the hands of the assessee. Accordingly, we find no merit in the present appeal filed by the Revenue. - ITA No.914/Del/2014 (Assessment Year 1995-96) - - - Dated:- 27-4-2020 - ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tice to the assessee to explain as to why the said expenditure be allowed as business expenditure. The relevant para of the show cause notice is as under:- 3. In respect of the unabsorbed investment allowance amounting to ₹ 4,18,31,075/- disallowed by the AO. and subsequently confirmed by the Ld. CIT(A), in para 25 of its order the Hon ble ITAT has directed the AO to allow the benefit of unabsorbed investment allowance of erstwhile M/s. Flow-more Polyester Limited in terms of section 32A(6) of the Act and that if the conditions specified in section 32A(6) are complied with, the amount of unabsorbed investment allowance be allowed in the hands of the assessee company. In view of these directions of the Hon'ble ITAT you are req ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t would not be possible to accept the claim. Since, the assessee has not filed sufficient and necessary details/documentary evidences it is not possible to ascertain whether conditions specified on this behalf are fulfilled or not. Accordingly, the claim made by the assessee is not being allowed. However, it may be mentioned that as and when the assessee makes proper compliance, the issue will be examined in accordance with the directions of the Hon ble ITAT and relief will be allowed accordingly. 6. The matter travelled to the CIT(A) and the explanation of the assessee was the contention of section 32A(6) had to be complied with and since the assessee had complied the said condition and furnished proper evidence in this regard, the c ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s above. The AO had to see whether the assessee had fulfilled the conditions of section 32A(6)but he laid emphasis on the provisions of section 72 A of the Act, which is misplaced. The relevant submissions of the assessee in this regard are as under:- 2. This is known fact that Flow-more Polyester Limited merged with the assessee company w.e.f. 01.04.1994. 3. From the balance sheet of the assessee which has already been examined during assessment proceeding, it is apparent that during the year under appeal the appellant has invested in plant and machinery amounting to ₹ 10124.36 Lakhs which is much more than the required investment of ₹ 314 Lacs for allowing the unabsorbed investment allowance. The assessing officer h ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on72A of the Act which the AO had relied upon in the original assessment order and which were adjudicated upon by the Hon ble ITAT. The specific issue which remained to be decided was whether various conditions as specified in section 32A(6) and the section32A(4), 32A(3) as referred in section 32A(6) of the Act are fulfilled in the appellant s case. The appellant has elaborately shown that the conditions specified in section 32A(6) of the Act are fulfilled by it. Therefore, the claim of the appellant is fully justified. The AO was not justified in denying the appellant s claim without really examining the issue. Ground No. 4 of the appeal is allowed. 11. The learned DR for the Revenue has failed to controvert the findings of the CIT(A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
