9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 144X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e of appellate proceedings before the Hon'ble Tribunal.' 2. Ground No.1 pertains to the deduction claimed u/s.80IA(iv)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act'). 3. The brief facts on the issue are that during the assessment proceedings, the Assessing Officer found the assessee had claimed a deduction of Rs. 1,77,45,946/- u/s.80IA(4)(iv)(a) of the Act. The assessee submitted its explanation vide letter dated 13.03.2015 and the same is scanned on Page 2 in Para 5 of the assessment order. The Assessing Officer after considering the submissions of the assessee disallowed the deduction under the said provision and added the amount to the income of the assessee. 4. In the written submissions filed before the Ld. CIT(Appeals), it was contended by the Ld. AR drawing his attention to CBDT Circular No.1/2016 dated 15.02.2016 wherein the CBDT has clarified that the term 'Initial Assessment Year' in Section 80IA (5) of the Act would mean the first year opted for by the assessee for claiming deduction u/s.80IA and not the year in which the eligible business has commenced. Further, the CBDT Circular directed the Assessing Officers to allow deduction u/s.80IA in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee submitted that in the preceding assessment year i.e. 2011-12 where this claim of deduction u/s.80IA(4)(iv)(a) of the Act was denied by the Assessing Officer and confirmed by the Ld. CIT(Appeals), the assessee preferred an appeal before the Pune Bench of the Tribunal and the Tribunal vide order dated 16.06.2017 in ITA No.1036/PUN/2016 for assessment year 2011-12 in assessee's own case reversed the findings of the Ld. CIT(Appeals) and allowed the relief provided to the assessee by observing as follows: '9. We heard both the sides on this issue and perused the orders of the Revenue and the cited decisions before us. On perusal of the said order of the Pune Bench of the Tribunal, we find the decision of the Tribunal is relevant for the following proposition: 'Assessee having chosen A.Y. 2004-05 as the initial assessment year and paid taxes on the profits of its windmill activity in the earlier years as per the statute, the year in which the assessee started generating electricity (A.Y. 2002-02) cannot be treated as the initial assessment year for the purposes of sec. 80IA(2) r.w.s. 80IA(5); initial assessment year for the above purposes is the first year in which the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r ten consecutive years, out of a slab of fifteen (or twenty) years, as prescribed under that sub section. It is hereby clarified that once such initial assessment year has been opted for by the assessee, he shall be entitled to claim deduction u/s.80IA for ten consecutive years begging from the year in respect of which he has exercised such option subject to the fulfillment of conditions prescribed in the section. Hence, the term 'initial assessment year' would mean the first opted for by the assessment for claiming deduction u/s.80IA.......' From the above circular also, it is crystal clear that assessee who is eligible to claim deduction u/s.80IA has the option to choose the initial/first year from which it may desire the claim of deduction. 5.3 The Ld. AR further submitted that no deduction have been claimed u/s.80IA of the Act for the entire period of assessment years 2007-08 to 2009-10 and that the decision of the Special Bench of Tribunal relied on by the Ld. DR in the case of Goldmine Shares and Finance Pvt. Ltd. reported in 113 ITR 209 was much prior to the CBDT Circular (supra.). 6. Per contra, the Ld. DR has placed strong reliance on the findings of the Assessing Off ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wing Rs. 9,84,391/- being prior period depreciation on investment in premises. He erred in not appreciating that the above amount of Rs. 9,84,391/- was grouped in book depreciation of Rs. 5,30,66,886/- in Note No.24 of the Audited Annual Accounts and that the entire amount of Rs. 5,30,66,886/- was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. 10. The assessee on this issue has submitted before the Department, the copy of the audited annual accounts of the company for the year ended 31.03.2012, Tax Audit Report regarding the disclosure of the prior period expenses, copy of the statement of total income filed separately and it was submitted that the assessee had added back the entire book depreciation of Rs. 5,30,66,886/- i.e. including the depreciation on investment in premises for prior period in the statement of total income. Therefore, no further disallowance is warranted. 11. The Ld. CIT(Appeals) on this issue has held as follows: '7.3 Decision :- I have perused the assessment order and the submission made by the appellant as above carefully. I find that the disallowance was wrongly made by the AO for the reason that the side amount of Rs. 9,84,391/- being ' Depre ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
