9911796707
TMI Blog2022 (12) TMI 1125X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee arising out of the common order of the Ld. CIT(A)-IV, Kanpur, dated 30.08.2018 pertains to Assessment Years 2011-12 to 2015-16, respectively. 2. The grounds of appeal are common in all these appeals, therefore, we are referring the grounds of appeal for Assessment Year 2011-12, which reads as under:- 1. Whether on facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in law by deleting the disallowance of claim u/s 80IC of the I.T. Act, 1961 on grounds that no disallowance was made in A.Y. 2010-11 by A.O. u/s 143(3)/153A which is factually incorrect as the asseesee had not at all claimed any deduction w/s 80IC in A.Y. 2010-11 and therefore the adverse inference drawn by Ld. CIT(A) on this basis suffers from perv ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... response, assessee filed its return of showing income of Rs.1,97,46,865/-, Rs.2,68,80,567/-, Rs.2,81,26,793/-, Rs.4,75,66,911/- and Rs.8,38,39,740/- for A.Y. 2011-12 to A.Y. 2015-16 respectively. Later on, notices u/s 143(2) & 142(1) were also issued and A.O. completed the assessment by making disallowance of Rs.1,97,46,865/-, Rs.2,68,80,567/-, Rs.1,20,54,340/-, Rs.2,03,85;819/- and Rs. 3,59,31,318/-deduction claimed u/s 80IC of the Act, for A.Y. 2011-12 to A.Y. 2015-16 respectively. In assessment order, the Assessing Officer noted that the assessee has submitted complete books of accounts, ledger accounts with supporting bills and vouchers, copy of bank statement etc. No defect whatsoever was noted therein. In the concluding portion of th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ot be accepted because of the following reasons; i) Assessment order does not reveal that, the Assessing Officer has specifically requisitioned the details of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act from the appellant, during the course of proceedings u/s 153A/143(3) of the Act. ii) Appellant's claim of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act was backed by the specified audit report and the other financial statements, which were submitted by the appellant, during the course of the assessment proceedings. iii) Assessing Officer has not pointed out any specific defects in the financial statements and the specified audit report furnished by the appellant, during the course of the assessment proceedings. In fact, the Assessing Officer has himself admitte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sustainable. More so when the AO himself noted that the assessee has furnished complete details and no defect has been pointed out. In this view of the matter, in our considered opinion, there is no infirmity in the order of the Ld. CIT(A), hence, we uphold the same. Cross Objection for Assessment Year 2011-12 7. In the Cross objection, challenge made by the assessee is that the addition has been made de-hors incriminating material found during search. The assessee had also relied upon Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of Kabul Chawla (2016) 380 ITR 573 (Del.). The Ld. CIT(A) has dismissed this ground of the assessee. We find that the same is only of academic interest. As, we have upheld the Ld. CIT(A)'s order on mer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
