TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (7) TMI 188
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of the claim of deduction of Rs. 3,89,93,876/- under the provisions of section 80IC of the I.T. Act. 2. The Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(A) has erred in law and on facts in admitting additional evidences in course of the appellate proceedings in violation of Rule-46A of the I.T. Rules. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case, the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. It is therefore, prayed that the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax (A) may be set aside and that of the Assessing Officer be restored. 2. Briefly stated facts are that the case of the assessee was picked up for scrutiny assessment and the a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....le for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. 3.2 On the contrary, ld. Counsel for the assessee Shri M. K. Patel opposed the submissions of the ld. DR and supported the order of the ld. CIT(A). Ld. Counsel for the assessee submitted that the finding of the Assessing Officer is factually incorrect and, as such, the deduction has been disallowed by the Assessing Officer purely on the basis of conjunction and surmises. He drew our attention to the paper-book to demonstrate that there was a new undertaking established by the assessee-firm and all requirements of law are duly met with by the assessee-company for becoming eligible for claiming deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. 4. We have heard the rival contentions, perused the material available on r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ss to new business. 4.1 The Assessing Officer also observed that goods might have been produced at their own factory and might have been transferred to assessee-firm without making any entries in the books of account. After considering the totality of the facts and circumstances, the Assessing Officer declined the claim of deduction of the assessee. However, on appeal, the ld. CIT(A), after considering the submissions of the assessee, has allowed the claim of the assessee. 4.2 The issue before us for adjudication is whether the assessee-firm is entitled for deduction u/s 80IC of the Act under the facts and circumstances of the year under appeal. As per section 80IC(4) of the Act, following conditions are required to be fulfilled by th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....lant company did not furnish quantitative reconciliation of finished goods and raw material. The A.O. has also mentioned that in Assessment Year 2007- 08, the appellant had claimed deduction u/s. 10A for the same business, whereas In the current year, the appellant has claimed deduction u/s. 80IC. Since the claim was not made in the first year itself, the appellant cannot claim it in this year. During the course of appellate proceedings, appellant has submitted detailed information regarding establishment of the unit and has also furnished photo copies of the purchase bills of the machinery. It has also submitted various certificates such as registration under Factories Act, drug license with change of name, certificate from environment pro....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed during the course of appeal, I am of the opinion that the appellant satisfies all the conditions for claim of deduction u/s. 80IC. The A. O. has merely disallowed the claim of the appellant on the basis of presumption. He has not given any material finding as to whether any particular machinery has been shifted to Himachal Pradesh or the appellant has not in fact produced any product at that unit. All the findings given by the A. O. are on the basis of presumptions and without any factual support. Regarding the claim of deduction u/s. 10A for A. Y. 2007-08, the appellant has demonstrated that it was a bonafide mistake. The certificate also show that the claim was u/s. 80IC and not u/s. 10A. In the present year also, the appellant has ....