TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2025 (1) TMI 814
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....5.01.2024 passed for A.Ys. 2017-18 & 2018-19. 2. The Assessee has taken the following grounds of appeal:- "1. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in passing the impugned order ex-parte and without deciding the Appeal on merits. 2. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the action of learned AO in levying penalty u/s 270A of the Act amounting to Rs. 36,31,592/-. 3. In any case, the quantification of the penalty is erroneous and excessive. 4. In any case, the penalty order is barred by limitation and therefore not sustainable. 5. Learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in not properly appreciating and considering various evidence and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....expenses under the head "other expenses" to the unit on which 80-IA deduction was claimed (power plant unit) and the other unit on which no deduction was claimed (steel unit). Considering the turnover of the assessee, the Assessing Officer was of the view that 10% of the "other expenses" was attributable to unit on which deduction under Section 80-IA of the Act was being claimed by the assessee. Since a sum of Rs. 20.98 crores had been shown as "other expenses" where 10% of these other expenses i.e. Rs. 2.09 crores were considered to be expenses made under Section 80-IA of the Act, this amount of Rs. 2.09 crores was held to be attributable to such exempt unit and the same was disallowed and added to the total income of the assessee. The Ass....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....CIT(A) deleted the allocation with respect to these expenses holding that the expenditure of Rs. 1.6 crores was not allocable to the 80-IA unit, since they were exclusively for manufacturing activity. Regarding, the allocation of 10% of "administrative and other expenses" to the 80-IA unit, Ld. CIT(A) held that the same should be allocated in proportion of the turnover of the eligible and non-eligible unit i.e. the expenses are required to be allocated in the ratio of turnover of power plant and the steel unit and directed the Ld. Assessing Officer to allow the claim of the assessee accordingly. In the appeal filed by the Department, the ITAT vide order dated 15.06.2022 dismissed the appeal of the assessee and upheld the order passed by Ld.....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issioner (Appeals) passed ex-parte order in violation of principles of natural justice, as he had not passed order as per mandate of provisions of Section 250(6), one more opportunity should be granted to assessee to plead it's case before Commissioner (Appeals). Accordingly, in the interest of justice, the matter is restored to the file of Ld. CIT(A) for de-novo consideration and to pass appropriate orders, after giving due opportunity of hearing to the assessee and taking into consideration the orders passed by Ld. CIT(A) and ITAT for the impugned assessment year under consideration in quantum proceedings. 8. In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes. Now we shall come to Assessee's Appeal in ITA ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....s wholly unsustainable in law and on facts of the case. 8. Your appellant reserves the right to add, delete, modify, or revise any ground of appeal." 10. The brief facts of the case are that during the course of assessment, the Assessing Officer made addition of Rs. 31.46 lakhs on account of short income booking with respect to duty draw back received, but not offered for taxation by the assessee. Further, the Assessing Officer also made an addition of Rs. 2.70 crores by reducing the deduction allowable under Section 80-IA of the Act on account of apportioning of certain expenses from the ineligible unit (Sponge Iron Plant) to the eligible unit (solar power plant) by holding that the assessee had allocated excessive expenses to ....