TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (12) TMI 1154
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Mumbai [hereinafter referred to as the "CIT(A)"] relevant to the A.Y.2011-12. 3. The revenue has raised the following grounds: - "1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee on account of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) even though the application for the Form 3CM was submitted to the DSIR on 18.09.2013 and Form 3CM was valid from 01.04.2013 to 31.03.2016. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing relief to the assessee on account of weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) without considering the fact that in the case of ACIT vs. MECO instruments, the assessee applied for t....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,09,377/- (Rs. 3,56,18,753/- (-) 1,78,09,377/-). Thereafter, the total income of the assessee was assessed in sum of Rs. 8,02,45,520/-. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) allowed the claim of the assessee, therefore, the revenue has filed the present appeal before us. 5. We have heard the arguments advanced by the Ld. Representative of the parties and perused the record. The Ld. Representative of the revenue has argued that the CIT(A) has wrongly allowed the claim of the assessee, therefore, the finding of the CIT(A) is not justifiable, hence, is liable to be set aside. However, on the other hand, the Ld. Representative of the assessee has strongly relied upon the order passed by the CIT(A) in ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of appellant's case with Meco Instruments P. Ltd, where the honour able IlAT Mumbai, has categorically held as under: "it is clear that merely on the ground of technicalities of procedure, the benefit bestowed by legislature cannot be denied. When it comes to follow the prescribed procedure, the exemption provisions have to be liberally construed and if in substance, the assessee has fulfilled the basic requirements then the exemption cannot be denied." 6.3. I have considered the facts of the case as well as assessment order passed by the AG and the submission of the appellant. The AR of the appellant has produced following documents in support of his submissions and claim of weighted deduction u/s. 35(2AB) a. Application for reco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ns and factual narration of the caseby the Ld.AR, the factual analysis regarding the facts and the similarity of ratio of thepresent appellant case i.e, Mega Fine Pharma P Ltd. and the Meco Instruments Pvt. Ltd. can be depicted as under: Issues Facts of Meco Facts of Mega Fine Remark Assessment Year 2005-06 2011-12, 2012-13 & 2013-14 Deduction u/s 35(2AB) Weighted Deduction Claimed Weighted Deduction Claimed Same Position Details of R & D activities & Expenditure Submitted at the time of assessment Submitted to AO Same Position Form 3CM &3CL Not obtained Not obtained Same Position Form 3CK Not submitted Submitted to DSIR Copy fled with AO Better compliance by Mega Fine Approval....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....annot be denied. Thus, on careful considerations of the facts of Meco Instruments (supra) and the case in hand, it may be found that facts of both the cases are identical and therefore, I am inclined to follow the judgment of Meco Instruments P. Ltd for deciding the allow- ability of weighted deduction claimed by the appellant u/s. 35(2AB). Further, the Ld.AR has explained that the AO itself has found that most of the R&D expenses pertain to raw material purchases- and salary of the employees which are revenue in nature. The assessee company has already submitted bills and vouchers of the Research and Development expenses which pertain to in house R&D unit of the assessee company. Therefore, the expenses incurred for i....