9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1263X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rder in contravention of the provisions of S. 250(6) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 2. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, Worthy C1T(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO (CPC) of not allowing the deduction u/s 80-IC @ 100% even when the appellant was eligible for the same. 3. That on law, facts and circumstances of the case, Worthy CIT(A) has erred in confirming the action of Ld. AO (CPC) in holding that the issue in question raised by the appellant through its application is beyond the scope of sec. 154. 4. That on facts, circumstances and legal position of the case, the order passed by Ld. AO and then by Worthy CIT(A) deserves to be quashed since the same have been passed without affording reasonable opportun ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 154 was filed on the basis of the subsequent decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Aarham Softronics, wherein it was held that an eligible unit under section 80IC that undertakes substantial expansion is entitled to claim 100% deduction again for a further period of five years, subject to the overall cap of ten years. 5.1 The CIT(A) noted that while this judgment supports the assessee's claim, the benefit under section 154 can only be given if all the required facts like proof of substantial expansion were already part of the assessment record. In this case, the assessee had not claimed 100% deduction in its return, and there was nothing on record to show that any substantial expansion had taken place. 5.2 Because of this, ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... honour. 3. The above referred issue stands settled by decision of Larger Bench in favor of assessee in case of Aarham Softronies (SC Larger Bench) Civil Appeal No. 1784/2019 dtd. 20.02. 19. It is prayed that this issue may please be decided.as per this decision. Further, this issue stands decided in assessee's favour in its own case by your Honour for A.Y 2015-16 as well as by the Hon'ble ITAT for A.Y. 2014-15. 8. Per contra, the Ld. DR relied on the order of the lower authorities. 9. Ground Nos. 1 and 3 are general in nature and do not require separate adjudication. 10. As regards Ground No. 2, we have heard the rival contention and perused the material available on the record. In the present case, we noticed that the assessee, engag ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
