The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Ordered Reassessment on Deduction Claim Under Section 80IB.
Facts
A search and seizure operation u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on 28.04.2015 at the premises of the assessee, Notice u/s 153A for AY 2013-14 to 2015-16 u/s 142(1) for AY-2016-17 of the Act were issued. In their response, assessee filed its return of income showing the income of Rs.5,93,19,600/-, Rs.13,17,16,950/-, Rs.16,62,88,690/- & Rs.11,61,39,080/- for AY 2013-14 to AY 2016-17 respectively.
Later on notice u/s 143(2) & 142(1) were also issued and the AO completed the assessment by making a disallowance of Rs.92,94,914/-. Rs.26, 27,397/-. Rs.24,33,634/- and Rs.46,293/- on account of deduction claimed u/s 80IB of the Act, for AY 2013- 14 to AY 2016-17 respectively.
Aggrieved by the addition, the assessee filed an appeal before the CIT (A), the Ld. CIT (A), dismissed the Appeal filed by the Assessee on 30-10-2018 by a common order, for the AY 2013-14 to 2016-17, which is order impugned in the above captioned Appeals.
Submissions
Counsel for the assessee addressing of Ground No.3 & 4 submitted that the CIT(A) has erred in confirming the addition of Rs.26,27,397/- claimed by the assessee u/s 80IB without considering the miscellaneous income i.e. discount on Freight expenses as income derived from business of the assessee for the purpose by computing deduction u/s 80IB of the Act.
DR submitted that the assessee has not made any submission on merit regarding addition made by the AO u/s 80IB of the Act before the Ld. CIT(A), but filed additional evidence u/s 46A of the Act without explaining how the additional evidence could prove the justification of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act for the income which cannot be treated as income derived from, therefore, the Ld. CIT(A) rejected the application for production of additional evidence and dismissed the appeal filed by the assessee by confirming the disallowance made by the AO.
Decision
The two member bench of Shamim Yahya, Accountant Member And Yogesh Kumar U.S., Judicial Member observed that it is a specific case of the assessee that, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the miscellaneous income of Rs.26,27,397/- while calculating the eligible income for deduction u/s 80IB.
The Tribunal said that the assessee has submitted copies of certain ledger accounts like slaughtering charges, account of gain of loss from forward contract, account of commission receipt, freight charges paid, account of JSB cargo and account of Refund from UP Sales Tax etc. but the addition evidence produced by the assessee has not been admitted by the CIT(A) on the ground that the same is outside the purview of conditions stipulated u/s 46A of the Act and further observed that the additional evidence would not in any way help the case of the assessee to substantiate the deduction u/s 80IB of the Act.
The court observed that the CIT(A) should have accepted the additional evidence and after verifying the documents produced by the assessee should have decided regarding eligibility or otherwise of the assessee regarding claim u/s 80IB of the Act, therefore, it deemed it fit to remand the matter to the file of the CIT(A) with direction to admit the additional documents produced by the assessee and decide the matter afresh.
Case title: Al-Dua Food Processing Pvt. Ltd. v/s DCIT
Citation: ITA No.8255/De l/2018
