Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (5) TMI 117 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/ 80IC - AR submitted that assessee has been claiming deduction under section 80-IC since A.Y. 2011-12 and the same has never been disallowed - principles of consistency - there was no CBDT notification notifying the industrial area as per the scheme framed - HELD THAT:- Undertaking in respect of which deduction has been claimed u/s 80IC falls in the specified Industrial area as per Notification No. 177/2004 dated 28-06-2004 issued by the CBDT in accordance with the scheme framed and notified by the Central Government for the state of Uttaranchal. Apparently, the said notification was not brought to the notice of ld CIT(A) and in absence of the same, the ld CIT(A) has denied the deduction under section 80IC(2)(a)(ii). There is no dispute that the undertaking satisfies the other conditions specified therein. It is engaged in the assembly and manufacturing of LED Televisions and blaster of CFL bulbs and is thus not engaged in manufacturing or producing any article/ thing as specified in Thirteenth Schedule. As per the assessment order for A.Y 2013-14 passed u/s 143(3) dated 27.03.2016, the Assessing officer has recorded a finding that financial year 2012-13 is the third year after commencement of business and is eligible for deduction u/s 80IC - financial 2010-11 would be the first year of commencement of business and the undertaking had begun manufacturing before 01.04.2012 and thus, satisfied all the conditions. Revised audit report in Form 10CCB has been filed during the course of assessment proceedings which was not considered by the AO on account of a mistake on the part of the auditor where he has wrongly mentioned the date of issue of such report as in the original audit report, however, there is no dispute that the assessee substantially complies with all the conditions as prescribed for claim of deduction u/s 80IC of the Act and during the appellate proceedings, the ld CIT(A) has accepted the revised audit report which is not disputed by the Revenue. Only dispute which remains before the ld CIT(A) was that there was no CBDT notification notifying the industrial area as per the scheme framed by the Central Government which the assessee has now filed and the same has been examined. In light of the aforesaid discussion, we set-aside the order of the lower authorities and direct the Assessing officer to allow the deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. The matter is accordingly decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
|