Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding
  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2020 (8) TMI 723

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... on 29.04.2016 manually. While dismissing the appeal in limine, it has been stated by the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in the impugned order that vide Notification no. 11 of 2016 (F No. 149/150/2015-TPL) issued on 1st March, 2016, any person who was required to file the return of income electronically was to furnish the appeal (Form No. 35) electronically only. The Ld. CIT (A) also stated that vide Circular No. 20 of 2016 dated 26.05.2016, the CBDT has extended the date for e-filing of appeals till 15.06.2016. The Ld. CIT (A) held that since the assessee had not filed the appeal electronically, the appeal was to be dismissed as being in fructuous. Against this order passed by the Ld. CIT (A), the assessee has approached the Trib .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellant could claim the benefit of section 80IC of the Act. 6. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that though, from the wording of the order of Hon'ble Delhi High Court and scheme of arrangement for merger, it appears that Mahle Filter Systems (India) Ltd. got merged with Purolator India Ltd. but the facts are completely contradictory. 6.1 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that for all effective purposes, Purolator India Ltd. got merged with Mahle Filter Systems (India) Ltd. and a facade was created so that the resultant company which is Mahle Filter Systems Ltd., i.e., the assessee company, can claim benefit of deduction under section 80-IC. 6.2 That the assessing officer er .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... a strategic decision in order to expand and to synergize its business operations and the Directorate of Industries, had acknowledged the merger of erstwhile Mahle into the appellant and consequent change of name of the appellant. 6.7 That the Ld. assessing officer erred on facts and in law in holding that 'other income' being rent receipts, interest receipts, scrap sales, discount received, foreign exchange gain, etc. amounting to Rs. 67,88,259 not being the profits derived from manufacturing activities as the Parwanoo unit, is to be excluded from profits eligible for deduction under section 80IC of the Act. 6.8 That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law and failed to appreciate that aforesaid other income has been derived fro .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... essing officer erred on facts and in law in disallowing a sum of Rs. l ,18,43,476 out of the royalty paid to Mahle Filter Systeme GmbH and Mahle Filter Systems Japan as per the 'Technical Assistance Agreement' holding the same to be a capital expenditure incurred for acquisition of intangible asset. 8.1 That the assessing officer erred on facts and has failed to appreciate that the royalty was paid only for license to use technology and the same was an allowable deduction as revenue expenditure. Re: Charge of interest 9. That the assessing officer erred on facts and in law in levying interest under section 234B of the Act. The appellant craves leave to add, amend, alter or vary the above grounds of appeal at or before the time of he .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... tronically before 15.06.2016 were to be treated as appeals filed within time. It was also submitted that the assessee has filed the appeal electronically also on 10.05.2017 which was still pending before the Ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (A). 4.0 Per contra, the Ld. Senior DR vehemently argued that the Ld. CIT (A) had no option but to dismiss the appeal because it was mandated by the Rules that appeals filed manually by any person who was required to file the return of income electronically could not be entertained. The Ld. Senior DR argued that the Ld. CIT (A) could not have overlooked the mandatory requirement of e-filing of appeals and, therefore, he was justified in dismissing the appeal. 5.0 We have heard the rival submissions and h .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates