2021 (6) TMI 138
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....For the Revenue : Shri Mahadevan A.M. Krishnan ORDER PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM : This Miscellaneous Application filed by the assessee to rectify the mistake of the order dated 28-01-2020 passed by this Tribunal in ITA No. 13/PUN/2016 for A.Y. 2010-11. 2. By this Miscellaneous Application the assessee seeking the rectification of order dated 28-01-2020 passed in ITA No. 13/PUN/2016 on the g....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o the contention of the assessee that the AO made addition on account of bogus purchases amounting to Rs. 2,29,96,335/- though the assessee is entitled to claim of deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(b) of the Act. She submits further vide Para No. 5 admitting additional ground but observed "the claim of deduction was not made by the assessee and Assessing Officer had no occasion to take a view in the matter. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ision of Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Gems Plus Jewellery Ltd. reported in 233 CTR 248 and the Tribunal ought to have allowed additional ground since the assessee is eligible to claim deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(b) of the Act. She further contends that this Tribunal without considering the same remanded the matter to the file of AO for fresh consideration and referred to Para No.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of the assessee. Further, the Hon'ble High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Gems Plus Jewellery Ltd. (supra) the which held the alleged bogus purchases would be added to the infrastructural profit of the assessee which is exempt u/s. 80IA(4)(b) read with clause (c) of the explanation to section 80IA of the Act. 9. The main controversy before us is that having made alternative claim before ....