Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (2) TMI 981 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IC and deduction u/s 80IB denied - reopening of assessment - whether when the deductions under section 80IC as well as under section 80IB of the Act have been granted in the initial assessment years, the same could not be rejected for the subsequent assessment years unless the relief allowed for the initial year was withdrawn? - Held that:- Once deduction is granted in the initial assessment year, the same would continue for the period of ten consecutive years unless the relief for initial assessment year is also withdrawn. We are conscious of the fact that in coming to such decision, the SIMPLE FOOD PRODUCTS PVT. LTD. VERSUS COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-II, NAGPUR [2017 (8) TMI 646 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] did notice the absence of the Revenue to establish that for the subsequent assessment years in dispute, the facts were different from the facts on which the claim for deduction in the initial year was allowed. Clearly, in the instant year when the claim of deduction is rejected by the Assessing Officer, the relief allowed in the initial assessment year has not been withdrawn. Mere initiation of proceedings under Section 148 of the Act to reopen the assessment of the past year cannot be understood to mean that the ‘claim is withdrawn’. Therefore, in our view, the Assessing Officer could not have rejected the claim for deduction under Sections 80IB as well as 80IC of the Act in the subject assessment order because the relief allowed in the initial assessment year was not withdrawn at the time of such rejection in the instant year. Disallowance u/s 14A - Held that:- Disallowance under Section 14A of the Act cannot exceed the exempt income is being generally accepted by the Benches of the Tribunal. The learned representative for the respondent-assessee submitted that the respondent does not wish to press its Cross-objection once the view taken by the CIT(A) is accepted. We find no reasons to distract from the stand taken by the CIT(A) on this aspect, which is in conformity with the judgment of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of Cheminvest Ltd. vs CIT [2015 (9) TMI 238 - DELHI HIGH COURT]. MAT - direction by the CIT(A) not to include the disallowance u/s. 14A for the purpose of computing tax liability u/s. 115JB - Held that:- This decision of the CIT(A) is consistent with the decision of the Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Vireet Investment (P.) Ltd., [2017 (6) TMI 1124 - ITAT DELHI]
|