TMI Blog2013 (8) TMI 46X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed against Revenue. - Income Tax Appeal No.-53 of 2004 - - - Dated:- 31-7-2013 - Hon'ble Sibghat Ullah Khan And Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra,JJ. For the Appellant : P. Agrawal For the Respondent : Amit Shukla, Pradeep Kumar, Wasiuqddin Ahmad ORDER (Delivered by Hon'ble Dr. Satish Chandra, J) Present appeal has been filed by the department under Section 260 A of the Income Tax Act, against the judgment and order dated 15.04.2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Lucknow in I.T.A.No.1291/Alld/1995, for the assessment year 1990-91. On 28.09.2004, a coordinate Bench had admitted the appeal on the following substantial questions of law:- (a) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has erred in law in directi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ribunal, who vide impugned order has allowed the claim of the assessee. In the application under Section 154 of the Act, the assessee has restricted its claim to Rs.25,07,554/- i.e. equal to gross income. Thus, in the present appeal, the amount is involved Rs.25,07,554-Rs.8,39,174=Rs.16,68,380. Being aggrieved, the department has filed the present appeal. With this background, Sri D.D.Chopra, learned counsel for the department, at the strength of written submission, submits that there is no dispute that the assessee was entitled for the deduction of dividend income received on the units of UTI, but the said claim cannot be accepted under Section 154 of the Act. The claim for deduction under Section 80M on dividend income of Rs.62,10,000/- ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ved that:- "Officers of the department must not take advantage of ignorance of an assessee as to his rights. It is one of their duties to assist a taxpayer in every reasonable way, particularly in the matter of claiming and securing reliefs and in this regard the officers should take the initiative in guiding a taxpayer where proceedings or other particulars before them indicate that some refund or relief is due to him. This attitude would, in the long run, benefit the department, for it would inspire confidence in him that he may be sure of getting a square deal from the department. Although, therefore, the responsibility for claiming refunds and reliefs rests with the assessees on whom it is imposed by law, officers should:- (a) draw ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... per profits tax record or in the income-tax record at the time the income-tax assessment was completed, it could not be said that the Income-tax Officer committed a mistake apparent from the record in omitting to grant the relief under Section 84." Lastly, learned counsel for the assessee justified impugned order. We have heard both the parties and gone through the material available on record. It may be mentioned that Section 80 M was omitted by the Finance Act, 2003 w.e.f. 01.04.2004. At the relevant time, Section 80M was as under:- "80M. Deduction in respect of certain inter-corporate dividends-(1) Where the gross total income of a domestic company, in any previous year, includes any income by way of dividends from another domest ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nt with the submission made by the learned counsel for the Department that under Section 154 of the Act, the claim is not allowable, for the reason that the AO has already allowed some claim under Section 80M of the Act. The A.O. might have not allowed the friction of the claim. When the claim is allowable then why it should not be allowed as per law. Genuineness of the claim is not doubtful. Therefore, the restricted claim under Section 80M of the Act is allowable as the same is not new one for Rs.25,07,554/- i.e. not to exceed the gross income. Out of which, the AO has already allowed a sum of Rs.8,39,174/-. Hence, the balance of Rs.16,68,380/- will have to be allowed as per law. With the above observation, we find no reason to interfer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
