Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2020 (11) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (11) TMI 417 - AT - Income TaxViolation of the provisions of Rule 46A of Income Tax Rule - assessee has made a fresh claim before CIT-(A) which was not made either in the Income tax Return or before the AO during the assessment proceedings - HELD THAT:- Income of the assessee has to be determined under the provisions of Act. In case the assessee unknowingly omitted to claim the deduction either in the Income Tax Return or during the assessment proceedings it is entitled claim the benefit of such deduction before the higher authorities In holding so we place our reliance on the judgment in case of CIT vs. Mitesh Impex&Ors [2014 (4) TMI 484 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] The assessee, indeed made a fresh claim before the Learned CIT-(A) but did not file any fresh documents. Moreover, the Learned CIT-(A) after admitting the fresh claim directed the AO to allow the deduction of the same after verification and quantification of the expenses - AO is still empowered to reject the claim of the assessee if such expenses represents the capital expenditure within the provisions of law. As such, we find that there was no fresh evidences as alleged by the revenue, which were entertained by the Learned CIT-(A) in violation of the provisions of Rule 46A of Income Tax Rule. Accordingly, we hold that there was no violation of the provisions of Rule 46-A of Income Tax rules. Product Development Expenses - Nature of expenses - Expenses are recurring in nature - We also note that the ld. DR has not brought anything on record suggesting that there was any benefit of enduring nature or any new assets coming into existence out of such expenses. Accordingly, we hold that such expenses are of revenue in nature but subject to verification of the AO as held by the CIT-(A). Hence, we uphold the finding of the Learned CIT-(A). Thus, the ground of appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.
|