9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (12) TMI 1154X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Revenue : Shri Vijay Kumar G. Subramanyam (Sr. AR) ORDER PER AMARJIT SINGH, JM: The above mentioned appeals have been filed by the revenue against the different order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the A.Ys.2011-12, 2012-13 2013-14. ITA. NO.5679/M/2017:- 2. The revenue has filed the present appeal against the order dated 12.06.2017 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A) ] relevant to the A.Y.2011-12. 3. The revenue has raised the following grounds: - 1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee on account of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) even though the application for the Form 3CM was submitted to the DSIR on 18.09.2013 and Form 3CM was valid from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2016. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee on account of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) without considering the fact that in the case of ACIT vs. MECO instruments, the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n record: - 6.2 During the course of appellate proceedings, the Ld. AR of the appellant submitted written submission, relevant portion of the same is reproduced as under. I have carefully considered the contentions of the AO as per his assessment order and the arguments of the AR along with his written submissions dated 17.05.2017. The AR of the appellant has filed following documents in support of his submission and claim of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB). a. Application for recognition of in-house R D Unit dated 11/03/2010 submitted to DSIR on 15/03/2010 along with Form SCK. b. DSJR recognition letter dated 21/09/2010. c. Judgment of honourable ITAT in case of Meco Instruments P. Ltd. d. Annual compliance letter for approved R D unit dated 05/08/2013. e. Application letter seeking approval u/s 33(2AB) dated 18/09/2013. d. DSIR approval letter dated 11/03/2014 along with Form no. 3CM. g. DSIR submission of report in Form 3CL dated 28/12/2015. h. Application for renewal and recognition letter dated 30/12/2015. It is found from the records that though the judgment of honourable of ITAT Mumbai in case of Meco Instruments I'. Ltd was brou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the exemption cannot be denied. After considering the submissions and the explanations and factual narration of the caseby the Ld.AR, the factual analysis regarding the facts and the similarity of ratio of thepresent appellant case i.e, Mega Fine Pharma P Ltd. and the Meco Instruments Pvt. Ltd. can be depicted as under: Issues Facts of Meco Facts of Mega Fine Remark Assessment Year 2005-06 2011-12, 2012-13 2013-14 Deduction u/s 35(2AB) Weighted Deduction Claimed Weighted Deduction Claimed Same Position Details of R D activities Expenditure Submitted at the time of assessment Submitted to AO Same Position Form 3CM 3CL Not obtained Not obtained Same Position Form 3CK Not submitted Submitted to DSIR Copy fled with ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ns of the facts of Meco Instruments (supra) and the case in hand, it may be found that facts of both the cases are identical and therefore, I am inclined to follow the judgment of Meco Instruments P. Ltd for deciding the allow- ability of weighted deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 35(2AB). Further, the Ld.AR has explained that the AO itself has found that most of the R D expenses pertain to raw material purchases- and salary of the employees which are revenue in nature. The assessee company has already submitted bills and vouchers of the Research and Development expenses which pertain to in house R D unit of the assessee company. Therefore, the expenses incurred for in house R D unit of appellant company are supported by bills and vouchers and duly verified by the AO. Hence, duly following the judgment of ITAT Mumbai in case of Meco Instruments P. Ltd, the weighted deduction claimed by the appellant u/s 35(2A5) is allowable and the AO is directed to allow the claim of the appellant. However, this is subject to the fact that if in future the decision of Hong,le ITAT Mumbai in the case of Nieco Instrument P.Ltd. is modified or reversed at higher judicial forum namely, The ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
