Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2016 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (5) TMI 232 - AT - Income TaxClaim of deduction u/s.80IB(10) - CIT(A) allowed the claim - filing of additional evidence - Held that:- Where the signature and verification on the memorandum of appeal was made by any agent of the assessee or for the Revenue and not by the assessee or the Assessing Officer, it cannot be held that the appeal or any application filed is a valid appeal or application. Further, as per the ITAT Rules, 1963, filing of additional grounds equates the procedure for filing of appeal with that of these applications. As far the assessee is concerned, the appeals are to be signed by the assessee and none other than the assessee. Hence, the preliminary objection by the ld. DR is not maintainable. Accordingly, the preliminary objection by the ld. DR is dismissed as non-maintainable and only AO can raise such ground. At the time of assessment proceedings, the assessee made the submissions before the AO, wherein product function, and dues dissimilar is relating to poultry, feed, compound premix was brought out but, the AO ignored all these and proceeded to compare the profit margin of independent companies manufacturing feeds and compound premix, which are dissimilar. The assessee has also furnished price level comparability of an identical product manufactured by an independent party and the same was also ignored by the AO. However, the assessee was produced the same before the CIT(Appeals), who after examining came to the conclusion that marketing price of the assessee is justified in view of the price chart by the comparable cases. As such, in our opinion, the findings given by the CIT(Appeals) in his order is appropriate and does not call for any interference - Decided in favour of assessee
|