TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2023 (12) TMI 496
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....d u/s. 143(3) r.w.s. 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as Act) dated 19.12.2017 by the ld. ACIT, Circle-1, (LTU), Delhi (hereinafter referred to as ld. AO). 2. At the outset, we find that the additional ground was raised by the assessee vide letter dated 21.9.2022. But the ld AR at the time of hearing stated that he is not pressing the same. The same is reckoned as a statement made from the Bar. Since no arguments were advanced for even admission of the said additional ground, the same is hereby dismissed as not admitted. 3. The only issue to be decided on merits in this appeal is as to whether the ld. CIT(A) was justified in confirming the action of the ld AO in disallowing an amount of Rs 1,98,93,520/- on acco....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssessee claimed deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act for Rs 3,52,73,520/- [Revenue expenditure of Rs 2,49,15,390/- and capital expenditure of Rs 1,03,58,130/- (51,79,065*2)]. The ld. AO restricted the deduction to Rs 1,53,80,000/- on the ground that DSIR had approved weighted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act to the extent of Rs 96.08 lacs on account of revenue expenditure and Rs 57.72 lacs (Rs 28.86 lacs *2) on account of capital expenditure. Accordingly, a sum of Rs 1,53,07,390/- on revenue account and Rs 45,86,130/- on capital account aggregating to Rs 1,98,93,520/- was disallowed by the ld. AO in the re-assessment. This action of the ld. AO was upheld by the ld. CIT(A). 6. The assessee submitted that the total expenditure actually incurre....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....h Court and granted deduction u/s 35(2AB) of the Act as claimed in the return. This was sought to be disturbed in the impugned re-assessment proceedings by the ld. AO by restricting the claim of deduction only for expenditures incurred from 2011.2012 to 31.3.2013. We find that the issue in dispute is already squarely addressed by the Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT vs Sandan Vikas (India) Ltd reported in 335 ITR 117 (Del) wherein it was held as under:- 1. The assessee claims that it is engaged in the business of manufacturing of automotive air conditioning and is also undertaking research and development activity in this behalf. In the assessment year, i.e., assessment year 2005-2006, the assessee claimed a ded....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....te Tribunal (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") has come to the conclusion that the assessee would be entitled to weighted deductions of the aforesaid expenditure incurred by the assessee in terms of the Section 35(2AB) of the Act and in coming to this conclusion, the Tribunal has relied upon the judgment of Gujarat High Court in CIT v. Claris Lifesciences Ltd. [2010] 326 ITR 251/[2008] 174 Taxman 113. We have gone through the aforesaid judgment of the Gujarat High Court and find that Gujarat High Court detailed in no-uncertain terms that the cut-off date mentioned in the certificate issued by the DSIR would be of no relevance. What is to be seen is that the assessee was in indulging in R&D activity and had incurred the exp....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... proper procedure will approve the facility or otherwise and the assessee will be entitled to weighted deduction of any and all expenditure so incurred. The Tribunal has, therefore, come to the conclusion that on plain reading of section itself, the assessee is entitled to weighted deduction on expenditure so incurred by the assessee for development of facility. The Tribunal has also considered Rule 6(5A) and Form No. 3CM and come to the conclusion that a plain and harmonious reading of Rule and Form clearly suggests that once facility is approved, the entire expenditure so incurred on development of R&D facility has to be allowed for weighted deduction as provided by Section 35(2AB). The Tribunal has also considered the legislative intenti....