TMI Blog2011 (5) TMI 935X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ompany is engaged in the business of manufacture of steel ingots. The assessment order was framed u/s 143(3) on 26.12.2007. In the said order, the Assessing Officer has disallowed the claim of the assessee made u/s 80IB of the Act and has made addition of ₹ 1,20,00,000/- as unexplained credit u/s 68 of the Act. The assessee has claimed deduction u/s 80IB of the Act amounting to ₹ 3,83,03,567/- in respect of profits derived by the assessee s undertaking at Pondicherry. The assessee did not file the necessary certificate in Form 10CCB of the Act alongwith the return of income filed on 18.7.2005 declaring income of ₹ 1,02,11,036/-. As per the provisions of section 80IB(13) r.w.s 80IA(7), the accounting of the undertaking elig ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... eligible subject to fulfillment of other conditions would be only 30%. On that basis, the Assessing Officer inferred that the audit as contemplated u/s 80IA(7) has not been done. So, the Assessing Officer has disallowed this deduction. Before the ld. CIT(A), it was submitted that commercial production started only on 3.11.2000. The assessee company was audited by an Accountant as defined in Explanation above section 288(2) but the report was not filed alongwith the return of income in prescribed form 10CCB. The report was submitted during the course of hearing and the copy of the report was enclosed with the appeal filed before the ld. CIT(A). The assessee has relied on the decision of Hon'ble Calcutta High Court rendered in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to oversight, it remained to be attached with the return of income. This mistake was detected when assessment proceedings started and at that time audit report was filed before the Assessing Officer. The return of income was filed on 18.7.2005 although it was due on 31.10.2005. This issue now stands covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Calcutta High Court referred to above. Therefore, we dismiss the ground raised by the Revenue in this regard. 4. The next issue of this appeal is regarding deletion of addition made u/s 68 of the Act. The facts apropos this issue are that during the year the assessee has received share application money and share premium from four corporate entities as under: ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
