TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (1) TMI 874
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... mentioned in the Memorandum of Understanding. The MOU further does not specify the type of research work it would undertake. Documentary proof that CCCPL is competent to carry out research work as specified by MOU has been failed to be submitted by the assessee. It was further found that no asset has been shown by the CCCPL in their balance sheet for research equipment though the MOU particularly envisaged that CCCPL would render and conduct all their health care and clinical research services and engagement at CIMS. Thus in the absence of necessary infrastructure facilities to carry out research work, the authority below has declined to accept such expenditure towards clinical research work rendered by CCCPL and, therefore, the Learned CIT(A) observed that the appellant has used this mode to reduce tax incidence in the appellant company by entering into MOU of CCCPL unequivocally. We have also carefully considered the judgment passed by the Jurisdictional High Court in the matter of Hemato Oncology Clinic (Ahmedabad) (P.) Ltd. but we are afraid, we cannot accept the submissions made by the learned Senior Counsel appearing for the assessee. We find that the fact of the instant....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the appellant. On the basis of the fact available in the case in hand, the Ld. Senior Counsel appearing for the assessee further relied upon the judgment passed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the matter of ITO vs. Hemato Oncology Clinic (Ahmedabad) (P.) (Ltd.) [2018] 93 taxmann.com 271 (Ahmedabad - Trib.). Accordingly he submitted that the Tribunal has not taken into consideration the judgment in its proper perspective on the identical facts. He, therefore, submitted that there is an error apparent of the face of the records and hence the order may be recalled to that extent. On the other hand, the Ld. DR relied upon the order passed by the Ld. Tribunal. 4. It appears that apparently the documents placed by the Ld. AR reveals the receipt of professional fees of CCCPL to the doctors for carrying out research work and non-research work to particularly from Page 47 of the Paper Book in ITA No. 3299/Ahd/2016 being part of the annual accounts which was somehow missed out by the Hon'ble Bench while deciding the issue which is an error apparent on the face of the records and thus further consideration on this issue is required. It was obviously not open to disregard a Co-o....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nced by the bench within no more than 90 days from the date of concluding the hearing. It is, however, important to note that the expression "ordinarily" has been used in the said rule itself. This rule was inserted as a result of directions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Shivsagar Veg Restaurant Vs ACIT [(2009) 317 ITR 433 (Bom)] wherein Their Lordships had, inter alia, directed that "We, therefore, direct the President of the Appellate Tribunal to frame and lay down the guidelines in the similar lines as are laid down by the Apex Court in the case of Anil Rai (supra) and to issue appropriate administrative directions to all the Benches of the Tribunal in that behalf. We hope and trust that suitable guidelines shall be framed and issued by the President of the Appellate Tribunal within shortest reasonable time and followed strictly by all the Benches of the Tribunal. In the meanwhile(emphasis, by underlining, supplied by us now), all the revisional and appellate authorities under the Income-tax Act are directed to decide matters heard by them within a period of three months from the date case is closed for judgment". In the ruled so framed, as a result of thes....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as, vide notification dated 19th February 2020, taken the stand that, the corona virus "should be considered a case of natural calamity and FMC (i.e. force majeure clause) may be invoked, wherever considered appropriate, following the due procedure...". The term 'force majeure' has been defined in Black's Law Dictionary, as 'an event or effect that can be neither anticipated nor controlled' When such is the position, and it is officially so notified by the Government of India and the Covid-19 epidemic has been notified as a disaster under the National Disaster Management Act, 2005, and also in the light of the discussions above, the period during which lockdown was in force can be anything but an "ordinary" period. 10. In the light of the above discussions, we are of the considered view that rather than taking a pedantic view of the rule requiring pronouncement of orders within 90 days, disregarding the important fact that the entire country was in lockdown, we should compute the period of 90 days by excluding at least the period during which the lockdown was in force. We must factor ground realities in mind while interpreting the time limit for the pronouncement of the order. La....