Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2022 (12) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (12) TMI 206 - ITAT CHANDIGARHDisallowance for 80IC deduction - fulfilling necessary conditions for claiming deduction - AO observed that, there was no proof that the new unit is an independent separate unit from the old one - Reliance on the statement of two employees one being a brand new employee and the other too low level employee and definitely not authorized to convey information in regard to the assessee - HELD THAT:- As seen that the employees whose statements have been relied upon were admittedly not the authorized personnel, hence not competent to comment. The report, accordingly, is a meaningless exercise. The fact that it was carried out on 29.03.2013 and the Report was filed on 30.03.2013 and was made available to the assessee also on the very same day and was somehow replied to scantily by the assessee also on 31.03.2013 leading to the passing of the order also on 31.03.2013, we find does not inspire any confidence in the fairness of the decision making process and hence is questionable. Effective and a fair hearing on the issues was denied to the assessee by the AB. The facts as thrashed out by the CIT(A) referring to the supporting evidences culled out from the assessment order itself taken into consideration by the CIT(A), we find are not rebutted by the Revenue. We find that the unrebutted facts on record are that the unit has duly been set up in the leased premises, electricity usage demonstrates the claim of the assessee, machinery has been purchased by the new unit. These facts are not disputed by the Revenue, ACs have been manufactured and sold. These have also been accepted by the AO Excise Tax records and all contemporaneous evidence remains unassailed on record. Accordingly, in the facts as they stand, we find that the facts as available on record cannot be faulted with. Being satisfied by the reasoning and conclusion drawn by the ld. CIT(A), the ground No. 2 raised by the Revenue is dismissed. Disallowance u/s. 36(1)(iii) - investment was made in the sister concern - HELD THAT:- The facts taken into consideration available on record namely that the assessee had sufficient interest free funds available sources in the year under consideration and the availability also in the year when the amount was advanced to M/s. Amber Enterprises which advance admittedly was not in the year under consideration are all relevant and cogent facts. These we find have not been assailed. Being satisfied with the detailed finding on facts based on evidences available on record, which have been considered by the First Appellate Authority. In the absence of any infirmity in the conclusion arrived at we find no good reason to interfere with the order. Ordered accordingly. Accordingly, the ground of the Revenue is dismissed.
|