TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2017 (4) TMI 472
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....efore him for contesting the order passed u/s. 154 r.w.s. 250 of the AO. dt. 27.03.2003 by not condoning the delay in filing the appeal and holding that the said appeal was filed beyond the permissible time and further erred in law and on facts by not liberally interpreting the provisions of s. 249(3) and not appreciating the fact that your appellant had a sufficient and reasonable cause for not presenting the appeal within the stipulated statutory period in as much as it was under a bonafide belief that having filed an appeal to ITAT against the order involving quantum of deduction u/s. 80HH, 80l and 80lA, no other appeal was to be filed on the same issue till such time the order was passed by the ITAT. b) Your appellant submits that: ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e in filing the appeal in time and the CIT(A) be directed to admit the said appeal and adjudicate the same. GROUND NO 2 - Income not considered and expenses deducted for calculation of profits eligible for deduction u/s 80HH. 80I & 80IA a) The Ld. CIT(A) erred in law and on facts in not adjudicating the ground on merit and dismissing the appeal by ignoring the action of the A.O.; i. in restricting the deduction u/s 80HH ,80I & 80lA to Rs. 9,46,26,957 instead of allowing the deduction in full of Rs. 16,91,02,466, ii. in restricting the deduction u/s 80HH ,80I & 80lA in the proceedings u/s 154, iii. in not giving full effect to the appellate order passed u/s 250 dt 08.02.2002 while passing an order dt 27.02.2002 for giving effe....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ial Undertaking and prays that such income be accepted as returned and the claim for deduction u/s 80HH ,801 & 80lA be allowed at Rs. 16,91,02,466/as computed by your appellant. Your appellants crave leave to add, alter or to modify any of the foregoing grounds of appeal if required. 3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. 4. In this appeal, assessee is basically aggrieved for dismissing the appeal by the CIT(A) on the ground of limitation. Facts in brief are that in the original assessment framed u/s.143(3), AO declined assessee's claim of deduction u/s.80HH, 80I & 80IA against the order of AO, assessee approached to the CIT(A) vide order dated 08/02/2002. CIT(A) restored the matter back to the AO to review the ma....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... that the assessee-company contested the issue in appeal to ITAT in appeal filed in time hoping to set aside the directions of CIT(A) of remanding the issue to file of A.O. has the company succeeded in appeal, the order of the CIT(A) and hence of AO giving effect would have become redundant and therefore there could not have been any need to file any appeal against the order of Ld. A.O giving effect to CIT(A)'s order. After the order was passed by the ITAT, assessee company on realizing the fact that the claim of deduction u/s. 80HH, 80I and 80lA had continued and had remained unaddressed, the assessee company had only two options in that circumstance that either to file an appeal before CIT(A) which assessee company has done or to file an ....