ITA NO.1331 OF 2014 NUTEK TECHNOLOGIES P LTD SECUND ERABAD PAGE 1 OF 3 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD B BENCH, HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI P.M. JAGTAP, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SMT P. MADHAVI DEVI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.1331/HYD/2014 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11) NUTEK TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,57 VAYUPURI, SECUNDERABAD 500094 PAN- AAACN 8015 F VS. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(1) HYDERABAD (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) FOR ASSESSEE : SHRI ABHAY SINGH FOR REVENUE : SHRI RAJAT MITRA, DR DATE OF HEARING : 21.04.2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24 .04.2015 O R D E R PER SMT.P. MADHAVI DEVI, J.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINS T THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A)-V, HYDERABAD, DATED 31.03.2014 RELATING TO A.Y 2010-11. 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CO MPANY WHICH IS IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURE OF ELECTRONIC ITE MS, FURNISHED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y 2010-11 ON 15.10.2010 ADMITTING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.17,75,460. DURING THE ASSESSMEN T PROCEEDINGS U/S 143(3) OF THE I.T. ACT, AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED R AND D EXPENSES TO THE EXTE NT OF RS.71,75,420. ASSESSEE WAS ASKED TO FURNISH THE DET AILS OF R&D CLAIMED BY IT. IN RESPOSE TO THE SAME, ASSESSEE FIL ED LEDGER COPY ITA NO.1331 OF 2014 NUTEK TECHNOLOGIES P LTD SECUND ERABAD PAGE 2 OF 3 OF THE R&D EXPENSES, BUT SUPPORTING VOUCHERS FOR TH E CLAIM OF R&D EXPENDITURE WERE NOT FURNISHED AND EVEN THE NOT E ON THE R&D EXPENSES AND THE ALLOWABILITY OF THE SAME WAS N OT FURNISHED. AO FURTHER OBSERVED THAT EVEN IN THE RET URN OF INCOME, ASSESSEE HAS NOT CLAIMED ANY DEDUCTION U/S 35 OF TH E ACT. IN VIEW OF THE SAME AO DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF R & D E XPENSES AND BROUGHT IT TO TAX. 3. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT (A) ALONG WITH NECESSARY DETAILS. THE CIT (A) CALLED FO R A REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO. THEREAFTER THE CIT (A) CONFIRME D THE ADDITION MADE BY THE AO. 4. AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE IS IN SECOND APPEAL BEFO RE US. THOUGH ASSESSEE HAS RAISED AS MANY AS 13 GROUNDS OF APPEAL, THE LD COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT ITS CONTEST WAS MAINLY ON GROUND NO.9. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE LD CIT (A) HAD CALLED FOR A REMAND REPORT FROM THE AO, BUT WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE REMAND REPORT, HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION. HE S UBMITTED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) WAS DATED 31.03.2014, WHEREAS THE AO HAS SUBMITTED THE REMAND REPORT ON 12.06.2014 WH EREIN HE HAS ACCEPTED THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IS IN O RDER. A COPY OF THE REMAND REPORT DATED 12.6.2014 IS FILED BEFORE U S. 5. AFTER HEARING THE LD DR AND AFTER CONSIDERATION OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO FILED BY THE ASSESSEE, WE F IND THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE IN ORDER BY THE AO. WE FIND THAT THE CIT (A), WITHOUT WAITING FOR THE R EMAND REPORT HAS CONFIRMED THE ADDITION, WHICH IS NOT JUSTIFIABL E. THEREFROE, ITA NO.1331 OF 2014 NUTEK TECHNOLOGIES P LTD SECUND ERABAD PAGE 3 OF 3 WE DEEM IT PROPER AND FIT TO SET ASIDE THE ORDER OF THE CIT (A) AND DIRECT THE CIT (A) TO RECONSIDER THE CLAIM OF THE A SSESSEE IN THE LIGHT OF THE REMAND REPORT OF THE AO. THE OTHER GRO UNDS OF APPEAL ARE NOT ADJUDICATED AT THIS STAGE. 6. IN THE RESULT, ASSESSEES APPEAL IS TREATED AS A LLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH APRIL, 2015. S D/ - S D/ - (P.M. JAGTAP) (P. MADHAVI DEVI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED 24 TH APRIL, 2015. VNODAN/SPS COPY TO: 1. NUTEK TECHNOLOGIES PRIVATE LIMITED,57 VAYUPURI, SECUNDERABAD 500094 2. DY. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 16(1) HYDERA BAD 3. THE CIT(A) V HYDERABAD 4. THE CIT IV HYDERABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, HYDERABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER