TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (8) TMI 749
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nd in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in concluding that the proviso to section 147 was satisfied on the basis of the contents of an internal correspondence sent by the Assessing Officer, for obtaining the approval of the Commissioner of Income Tax, ignoring the fact that the reasons furnished to the Appellant cannot be supplemented in any manner. 3) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in relying on the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT vs P.V.S. Beedies (P) Ltd reported in 103 Taxman 294, which justified a re-opening of assessment on the basis of audit objection based on facts, whereas, in this case the audit objection was on a point of law and such re-opening on the basis of audit objection on a point of law is not permitted as per the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of 'Indian & Eastern Newspaper Society vs CIT reported in [1979]2 Taxman 197. 4) On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT(A) erred in concluding, that the flat cancellation receipts are not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB. 2. The assessee vide application dated 11.04.2019 filed on 22.04.2019 has r....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e head "Other income". Section 80IB clearly stipulates that an undertaking developing and building housing projects approved before 31.03.01 by the local authority shall be entitled to avail 100% deduction of the profits derived from such housing projects. The Net profit of 2007-08 is inclusive of other income of Rs. 35,74,5071- viz income not related to the building of housing projects. This income is not eligible for any such deduction U/S 80lB and should be taxed in the hands of the assessee under the normal provisions of the I T Act, 1961. Failure to do so has resulted in escapement of income to that extent. Further, it is observed that the assessee has claimed deduction U/S 80IB to the extent of Rs. 10,49,36,726/-. Net profit from business activity is only Rs. 10,09,11,188/- and the same has been increased to a Gross Total Income of Rs. 10,49,36,726/- by way of Rs. 3,77,692/- on a/c of Disallowable prior period expenses, Rs. 44,253/- on a/c of Donation and 4,05,423/- on account of provision to gratuity, Rs. 36,87,656/- on account provision for doubtful debts and 35,642/- on account of disallowable expenses u/s 40A(3). These disallowances do not fall ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) Disallowance of provision for doubtful debts of Rs. 36,87,656/- (d) Provision for gratuity of Rs. 4,05,423/- (e) Disallowance u/s. 40A(3) of Rs. 35,642/-, (f) Treated the interest income of Rs. 35,74,507/- and Rs. 15,95,359/- as income from 'other sources' which was claimed by assessee as a part of profit derived by eligible unit under section 80IB. 5. On appeal before the ld. CIT(A), the action of Assessing Officer in reopening was upheld and other additions/disallowance as mentioned in para 3 (a) to (e) was allowed (deleted), however, the treated the interest income of Rs. 21,20,487/- as a part of profit derived by eligible undertaking against the net interest income of Rs. 5,25,128/- was dismissed. Further, flat cancellation receipt was not held as eligible for deduction under section 80IB(10) and directed the Assessing Officer to treat the same under the head "Income from other Sources'. Further aggrieved, the assessee has filed the present appeal before the Tribunal. 6. The assessee has also filed an application for admission of additional evidence under Rule 29 of Income Tax Rules. In the application, the applicant/assessee has contended tha....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e returned back during the relevant Financial Year, we admit the plea of assessee about additional evidence. We have noted that the assessee has infact furnished the statement of various receipts in a tabulated form and no corresponding evidence is placed on record. Thus, we admit the plea of additional evidence and will dealt with the issue of additional evidence at appropriate stage later. 10. We have also heard the submission of ld. Authorized Representative (AR) of the assessee and ld. Departmental Representative (DR) for the revenue on merits i.e. validity of re-opening and other grounds of appeal. We have also perused the material available on record. The ld. AR of the assessee submits that original assessment under section 143(3) was completed on 22.12.2009 accepting the returned income and allowing deduction of section 80IB. Notice under section 148 was issued on 08.02.2014. The case was re-opened after 4 year from the end of relevant Assessment Year. Reasons recorded were furnished to the assessee vide letter dated 06.10.2015. On perusal of reasons recorded it is clear that Assessing Officer was of the opinion that disallowance made by assessee in computation of inco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... income and allowing deduction of section 80IB. Subsequently, case was reopened under section 147. Notice under section 148 was issued on 08.02.2014. The case was reopened after 4 year from the end of relevant Assessment Year. Before ld CIT(A) the assessee submitted that the case was reopened after 4 years from the end of relevant assessment and there is no reference in the reasons recorded that there was any failure in disclosing fully and truly all the facts. The ld CIT(A) affirmed the action of assessing officer by taking view that that while obtaining the approval of CIT under section 151 the assessing officer has clearly held that there was failure on the part of the assessee in disclosing fully and truly all the material facts. Before us, the ld. AR of the assessee while pressing application for additional evidences vehemently argued that all the details, except interest income of Rs. 15,95,359/- as a part of profit and other income of Rs. 35,74,507/- as a part of profit derived by eligible undertaking was not before lower authorities. The assessee could not file details of other income because these were old record and on account of merger of assessee with other group com....