9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (8) TMI 509X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ke apparent from record. However, while holding so, he escaped the contents of Circular No.689 dated 24.8.1994 which clearly directs the Officers to allow rectification u/s. 154 for non filing of audit report or other evidence which could not be filed with the return of income. Also taking cognizance of this circular the Hon'ble High Court of Karnataka in the case of ITO vs. Smt. Mandira D Vakharia[ 2000 (11) TMI 48 - KARNATAKA HIGH COURT] has decided similar issue in favour of the assessee - We merit in the arguments of assessee and therefore, the appeals of the assessee are allowed. - ITA No.76 And 77/Lkw/2021 - - - Dated:- 25-5-2022 - Shri T. S. Kapoor, Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Swaran Singh, C.A. For the Respondent : Shri Harish Gidwani, D. R. ORDER These appeals have been filed by the assessee against the separate orders of learned CIT(A), both dated 31/03/2021. In these appeals, a common issue regarding disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB is involved and therefore, these appeals were heard together and for the sake of completeness, the grounds of appeal in I.T.A. No.76 are reproduced below: 1. That the Ld. C.I.T.(A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Delhi has erred in law and on facts in sustaining the alleged Addition/disallowances arbitrarily made by the Ld. A.O. is contrary to the Principles of natural justice and equity and deserves to be deleted. 8. That the impugned Assessment Order is without Jurisdiction and therefore is liable to be quashed. 2. The ld. AR Submitted that the only issue involved in these appeals is denial of exemption u/s.80IB of the Act for the reason that the audit report in Form-10CCB was not filed along with the return of income and was only filed after the intimation u/s. 143(1) was issued. The ld. AR submitted that auditor of the assessee who was also dealing with tax matters omitted to upload the audit report in Form-10CCB and therefore, the CPC rejected the claim of the assessee u/s. 80IB of the Act and the assessee, on receipt of intimation u/s. 143(1), filed application u/s. 154 of the Act after uploading the copy of audit report in Form-10CCB, which was rejected by CPC and therefore, appeal was filed before ld. CIT(A) against the order passed by the CPC u/s. 154 of the Act, which again was dismissed by ld. CIT(A) by holding that no mistake was apparent from the record. The ld. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal Bangalore in IT Appeal No.173(Bang.) of 1993 dated 23.9.1999, relating to the assessment year 1992-93, the revenue has come up in appeal under section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ('the Act'). According to the revenue, the following substantial questions of law arise from the order of the Tribunal: 1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances ol the case, the Tribunal was correct in holding that the disallowance made by the assessing authority in the assessee's case under section 143(l) of the Act was not proper? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was correct in law in holding Ihat the assessing authority was required to rectify the mistake under section 154 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 ? 2. Admit. 3. With the consent of the counsels for the parties, we proceed to answer the questions of law raised before us. 4. The respondent-assessee is a software consultant and is doing business of exporting the software out of India. The assessee filed her return for the assessment year 1992-93. Deduction under section 80HHE(4) and under section 8OGG of the Act was denied to the assess ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... mation available in the return or the accompanying accounts or documents is prima facie inadmissible. The earlier instructions of the Board were to the effect that no disallowance should be made on items on which two opinions are possible. The matter has been further considered by the Board in the light of the recommendations of the Tax Reforms Committee headed by Prof. Raja J. Chellaiah and it has been decided that prima facie disallowances shall be made only in respect of the following types of claims: (a ) Not relevant for the purpose of this appeal. (b) Any claim in respect of which there is an omission of information which is required, under the specific provisions of the Act or (he Rules, to be furnished along with the return to substantiate such claim. Example : If the audit report specified under section 80HHC(4), which is required to be filed along with the return of income, is not so filed, the deduction claimed under that section can be disallowed as a prima facie adjustment. Some more examples in this regard are non-filing of audit reports or other evidence along with the return of income as required under sections 12A(ft), 33AB(2), 35E(6), 4 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4) and other sections mentioned in the Board's circular. The assessee claiming deduction under sections 80HHE and 80GG would be similarly situated as an assessee claiming deduction under section 80HHC(4) or other provisions mentioned in the Board's circular. The use of the words '. . . and the like in the Board's circular would include the assessee who are claiming a similar relief although the provision of the Act is not specifically mentioned in the Board's circular. 10. The assessee would be entitled to the deductions in the rectification under section 154 to the extent permitted by the Board's Circular No. 669 dated 25-10-1993. The Assessing Officer was not right in law in disallowing the rectification application only on the ground that the assessee had failed to furnish the audit report along with the return of income. 11. The Tribunal was right in law in extending the benefit of Board's circular to the assessee's case as well. The Assessing Officer has rightly been directed to rectify his order and extend the benefit of deductions under sections 80HHE and 80GG to the assessee in terms of the Board's circular. 12. For t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
