BOMBAY MERCANTILE CO-OPERATIVE BANK LTD, MUMBAI V. ACIT CPC, Bangalore

ITA 2153/MUM/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1767 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2015-2016
• Appeal Filed On: 27-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D.G PANSARI
• Assessee Lawyers: LEARNED
• Keywords: Opportunity of being heard; Principle of natural justice; Reasonable cause; Condonation of delay
• Section: 154; 143(1); 80P; 13; 20

Judgement Text

B IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.2153/ MUM/2017 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2015 - 16) BOM BAY MERCANTILE CO - OP. BANK LTD. EMPLOYEES CO - OP. CREDIT SOCIETY LTD., NAVRATAN BUILDING, 69 P. DMELLO R OAD, CARNAC BUNDER, MUMBAI - 4 00009 / V. ACIT CPC POST BAG NO. 2, ELECTRONICS CITY POST OFFICE, BANGALORE - 560100 ./ PAN : AA AJB0706E ( / APPELLANT ) .. ( / RESPONDENT ) ASSESSEE BY: SHRI VIPUL JOSHI REVENUE BY : SHRI. D.G PANSARI / DATE OF HEARING : 28 .08.2018 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07 .09 .2018 / O R D E R PER RAMIT KOCHAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS APPEAL, FILED BY ASSESSEE , BEING ITA NO. 2153/MUM/2017 , IS DIRECTED AGAINST APPELLATE ORDER DATED 18.01.2017 PASSED BY LEARNED COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) - 28 , MUMBAI (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE CIT(A )), FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16 , THE APPELLATE PROCEEDINGS HAD ARISEN BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) FROM INTIMATION DATED 12.11.2015 ISSUED BY LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER (HERE INAFTER CALLED THE AO) U /S 143(1) OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE ACT) FOR AY 2015 - 16 . I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 2 2. THE GROUNDS OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE MEMO OF APPEAL FILED WITH THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, MUMBAI (HEREINAFTER CALLED THE TRIBUNAL) READ AS UN DER: - 1.1 THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - 28, MUM BAI, ['LD. CIT (A)'] ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL AS UNADMITTED, ON THE GROUND THAT THE APPEAL WAS BARRED BY TIME WITHOUT REASONABLE CAUSE. 1.2 WHILE DOING SO, THE LD. CIT (A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT: (I) BASING HIS ACTION ONLY ON SURMISES, SUSPICION AND CONJECTURE; (II) TAKING INTO ACCOUNT IRRELEVANT AND EXTRANEOUS CONSIDERATIONS; AND (III) IGNORING RELEVANT MATERIAL AND CONSIDERATIONS AS SUBMIT TED BY THE APPELLANT. 1.3 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE DELAY WAS REQUIRED TO BE CONDONED AND THE APPEAL WAS REQUIRED TO BE ADMITTED TO BE DECIDED ON MERIT. WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE 2.1 THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN DISMISSING THE APPEAL OF THE APPELLANT IN BREACH OF THE PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE. 2.2 WHILE DOING SO, THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN NOT GRANTING PROPER OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE APPELLANT AS WELL AS PASSING THE ORDER IN A VERY CRYPTIC WAY, WITHOUT APPLICATION OF MIND AND WITHOUT DEALING WITH VARIOUS GROUNDS AND SUBMISSIONS. 2.3 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE ORDER BE HELD AS BAD IN LAW. WITHOUT FU RTHER PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE 3.1 IN THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (CPC), ['THE A.O.'] IN PASSING THE INTIMATION U/S. 143 (1), DENYING T HE APPELLANT DEDUCTION U/S. 80 P OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ['THE ACT'] AS CLAIMED IN THE RETURN. 3.2 WHILE DOING SO, THE LD. CIT (A) FAILED TO APPRECIATE THAT: (I) UNDER SECTION 143 (1) ONLY AN INCORR ECT CLAIM WHICH IS APPARENT FROM THE RETURN OF INCOME OF THE APPELLANT COULD BE ADJUSTED; (II) THE ADJUSTMEN T MADE DENYING DEDUCTION U/S. 80 P OF THE ACT IS NOT AN INCORRECT CLAIM AS IT IS BEING CLAIMED AND ALLOWED TO THE APPELLANT SINCE THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS; AND I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 3 (C) IN ANY CASE AND WITHOUT PREJUDICE , THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80 P IS HIGHLY DEBATABLE IN NATURE AND, AS SUCH, NO ADJUSTMENT IN THIS REGARD COULD HAVE BEEN MADE BY THE A.O. IN AN INTIMATION U/S. 143 (1} OF THE ACT. 3.3 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, LD. CIT (A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O. BE HELD AS BAD IN LAW. ON MERITS: 4.1 THE APPELLANT SUBMITS THAT LD. CIT(A) ERRED IN CONFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE A.O IN NOT ALLOWING DEDUCTION TO THE APP ELLANT U/S. 80P OF THE ACT AS CLAIMED BY IT IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME SINCE IT FULFILLS ALL THE CONDITIONS FOR CLAIM OF THE DEDUCTION AS REQUIRED U/S. 80P. 4.2 IT IS SUBMITTED THAT IN THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, AND IN LAW, THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 80P WAS FULLY ALLOWABLE . 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD, ALTER, DELETE OR MODIFY ALL OR ANY OF THE ABOVE GROUNDS AT THE TIME OF HEARING . 3. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN E MPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT S OCIETY WHICH IS STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN PROVIDING FINANCIAL ACCOMMODATION AND LOANS TO ITS MEMBERS . THE ASSESSEE FILE D RETURN OF INCOME ON 22.09.2015 FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16 . THE ASSESSEE S RETURN OF INCOME WAS PROCESSED BY CPC, BA NGALORE U/S. 143(1) OF THE 1961 ACT, WHEREIN CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DEDUCTION OF RS.1,26,55,027/ - U/S. 80P OF THE 1961 ACT WAS DENIED TO THE ASSESSEE. THE INTIMATION U /S. 143(1) OF THE 1961 ACT DATED 12.11.2015 ISSUED BY ACIT,CPC, BANGALORE WAS STATED TO BE RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE ON NOTIFIED EMAIL ID OF THE C HARTE RED A CCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE ON 20 .11.2015 WHEREIN THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE 1961 ACT AS SET UP BY THE ASSESSEE WAS DENIED BY REVENUE . THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT IT IMMEDIATELY FILED ELECTRONIC RECTIFICATION REQUEST U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT ON 20.11.2015 ITSELF FOLLOWED WITH WRITTEN RECTIFICATION LETTER TO THE AO FOR GRANT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE 1961 ACT. THESE AVERMENTS ARE FOUN D MENTIONED IN AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 25.01.2016 EXECUTED BY DEPONENT SHRI MOHAMMED HANIF I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 4 MITHA WHO IS HONORARY SECRETARY OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS AVERRED AND CLAIMED THAT NO REPLIES HAVE SO FAR BEEN RECEIVED TO THE AFORESAID RECTIFICATION APPLICATI ON FILED U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT WITH REVENUE. IT IS ALSO AVERRED THAT APPEAL AGAINST INTIMATION DATED 12.11.2015 PASSED BY ACIT, CPC U/S 143(1) OF THE 1961 ACT WAS REQUIRED TO BE FILED BE FORE THE LD. CIT(A) LATEST BY 20.12.2016 BUT THE SAME WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ONLY ON 29.01.2016 WITH DELAY OF 40 DAYS BEYOND THE TIME STIPULATED FOR FILING AN APPEAL U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT . . THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED BE FORE LD. CIT(A) THAT DUE TO BONA FIDE REASON S, AN HONEST LAPSE HAS TAKEN PLACE WHICH LED TO DELAY IN F ILING OF THE APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE DULY FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 25 - 01 - 2016 EXPLAINING ITS BONAFIDE IN FILING APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND TIME PRESCRIBED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT . A N AFFIDAVIT DATED 25.01.2016 EXECUTED BY DEPONENT SHRI. MOHAMMED HANIF MITHA , AN HONORARY SECRETARY OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FILED BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) EXPLAINING DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND THE TIME STIPULATED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT . THE ASSESSEE ALSO FILED LEAVE ADVICE OF SHRI. MOHAMMED HANIF MITHA, OF 17 DAYS FROM 17.12.2015 TO 02.01.2016 BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) . THESE DOCUMENTS/ EVIDENCES FILED BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) ARE REPRODUCED HERE UNDER: - I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 5 I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 6 I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 7 I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 8 I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 9 THE LD. CIT(A) AFTER DISCUSSING ELABORATELY SEVERAL CASE LAWS REJECTED THE CONTENTION S OF THE ASSESSEE AND HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT SHOWN SUFFICIENT CASE FOR CONDONING THE DELAY OF 40 DAYS IN LATE FILING OF AN APPEAL BEYOND THE TIME STIPULATED U/S 249(2) OF THE 196 1 ACT . IT I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 10 WAS ALSO HELD BY LEARNED CIT(A) THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS AVAILED AN ALTERNATE REMEDY U/S. 154 OF THE ACT AND THE ASSESSEE COULD ALWAYS FILE AN APPEAL AGAINST AN ORDER PASSED BY THE AO U/S. 154 OF THE ACT. THUS , IN NUTSHELL THE ASS ESSEE WAS THROWN AT THRESHOLD BY LEARNED CIT(A) ON TECHNICAL GROUND OF DELAY IN FILING AN APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND TIME PRESCRIBED BY STATUTE AS WELL AS ON THE GROUND OF ALTERNATIVE REMEDY BEING AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE HAVING FILED AN RECTIFICATION APPLICATION U/S. 154 OF THE 1961 ACT. THE LD. CIT(A) DISMISS ED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE FILED AGAINST AN INTIMATION U/S. 143(1) OF THE ACT , VIDE APPELLATE ORDERS DATED 18.01.2017 . 4 . 1 THE ASSESSEE HAS NOW IN COME IN AN APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL AND GROUNDS HAS BEEN RAI SED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT IT HAS BEEN THROWN AT THRESHOLD ON TECHNICAL GROUND OF DELAY IN FILING AN APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS AND DOORS OF JUSTICE WERE SHUT TO THE ASSESSEE BY LEARNED CIT(A) WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE PLEA OF THE ASSESSEE ON MERITS OF THE CASE. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE THERE WAS A CLAIM OF DEDUCTION OF RS. 1.26 CRORES SET UP BY THE ASSESSEE IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME U/S. 80P OF THE 1961 ACT WHICH WAS NO T ALLOWE D BY R EVENUE VIDE INTIMATION ISSUED BY CPC, BANGALORE U/S. 143(1) OF THE ACT WHILE PROCESSING RETURN OF INCOME, WHICH HAS CAUSED SERIOUS PREJUDICE TO THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND THE TIME STIPULATED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT WHICH WAS SUPPORTED BY AN APPLICATION PRAYING FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY DULY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) ALONG WITH LEAVE ADVISE OF THE CONCERNED PERSON INCHARGE OF TAXATION MATTERS. T HE SAID DOCUMENT S ARE PLACED IN FILE . I T WAS SUBMITTED THAT LD. CIT(A) DID NOT CONDONE THE DELAY AND APPEAL WAS DISMISSED ON ACCOUNT OF DELAY IN FILING APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND THE TIME PRESCRIBED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT AND ALSO ON THE GROUNDS THAT AN ALTERNATIVE REMEDY BY WAY OF AN RE CTIFICATION APPLICATION U/S. 154 OF THE 1961 ACT WAS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE . I T IS STATED BY LD . COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT THE SAID RECTIFICATION I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 11 APPLICATION FILED U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT IS STILL PENDING BEFORE THE AO. IT IS PRAYED BY LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE THAT IF THE AFORESAID DELAY IS CONDONED BY TRIBUNAL AND THE ISSUES ARE RESTORED BACK TO LEARNED CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE WOULD PROVE WITH COGENT EVIDENCES ITS CASE ON MERITS BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A).IT WAS STATED THAT THE REVENUE HAD CONSISTEN TLY ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE ACT. 4.2 THE LD. DR ON THE OTHER HAND STATED THAT REVENUE HAS NO OBJECTION IF THE MATTER IS R ESTORED BACK TO THE FILE OF LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION . 5. W E HAVE CONSIDER ED RIVAL CONTENTION S AND HAVE PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD . W E HAVE OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE IS AN EMPLOYEES COOPERATIVE CREDIT SOCIETY WHICH IS STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN PROVIDING FINANCIAL ACCOMMODATION AND LOANS TO ITS MEMBERS . THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN OF INCOME ON 22.09.2015 FOR THE IMPUGNED ASSESSMENT YEAR 2015 - 16. THE ASSESSEES RETURN OF INCOME WAS PROCESSED BY CPC, BANGALORE U/S. 143(1) OF THE 1961 ACT, WHEREIN CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DEDUCTION OF RS.1,26,55,027/ - U/S. 80P OF THE 1961 ACT WAS DENIED TO THE AS SESSEE. THE INTIMATION U/S. 143(1) OF THE 1961 ACT DATED 12.11.2015 ISSUED BY ACIT,CPC, BANGALORE DENYING THE CLAIM U/S 80P OF THE 1961 ACT WAS STATED TO BE RECEIVED BY ASSESSEE ON NOTIFIED EMAIL ID OF THE CHARTERED A CCOUNTANT OF THE ASSESSEE ON 20.11.2015 . THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED THAT IT IMMEDIATELY FILED ELECTRONIC RECTIFICATION REQUEST U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT ON 20.11.2015 ITSELF FOLLOWED WITH WRITTEN RECTIFICATION LETTER TO THE AO FOR GRANT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80P OF THE 1961 ACT. THESE AVERMENTS ARE FOUN D MENTIONED IN AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 25.01.2016 EXECUTED BY DEPONENT SHRI MOHAMMED HANIF MITHA WHO IS HONORARY SECRETARY OF THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE HAS AVERRED AND CLAIMED THAT NO REPLIES HAVE SO FAR BEEN RECEIVED TO THE AFORESAID RECTIFICATION APPLICATI ON FILED U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT WITH REVENUE. IT IS ALSO AVERRED THAT AN APPEAL AGAINST INTIMATION DATED 12.11.2015 PASSED BY ACIT, CPC U/S I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 12 143(1) OF THE 1961 ACT WAS REQUIRED TO BE FILED BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A) LATEST BY 20.12.2016 BUT THE SAME WAS FILED ON 29.01.2016 WITH DELAY OF 40 DAYS BEYOND THE TIME STIPULATED FOR FILING OF AN APPEAL U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT.. THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED BEFORE LD. CIT(A) THAT DUE TO BONOFIDE REASONS, AN HONEST LAPSE HAS TAKEN PLACE WHICH LED TO DELAY IN FILING OF THE AP PEAL BEFORE THE LD. CIT(A). THE ASSESSEE DULY FILED AN APPLICATION FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 25 - 01 - 2016 EXPLAINING ITS BONAFIDE IN FILING APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND TIME PRESCRIBED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT. AN AFFIDAVIT DATED 25.01.2016 EXECUTED BY DEPONENT SHRI. MOHAMMED HANIF MITHA , AN HONBLE SECRETARY OF THE ASSESSEE WAS FILED BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) EXPLAINING DELAY IN FILING OF AN APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND THE TIME STIPULATED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT. THE SAI D AFFIDAVIT IS REPRODUCED ABOVE IN PRECEDING PARAS OF THIS ORDER. THE ASSESSEE FILED AN APPLICATION BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) PRAYING FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY IN FILING OF AN APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND TIME PRESCRIBED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT WHICH WAS S UPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT AS DETAILED ABOVE AND AN LEAVE APPL ICATION APPROVED BY THE EMPLOYER OF HONORARY SECRETARY WHO WAS RESPONSIBLE FOR LOOKING AFTER TAX MATTER. WE HAVE CAREFULLY GONE THROUGH THE CONTENTS OF THE SAID APPLICATION FILED BY ASSESSEE PRAYI NG FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY SUPPORTED BY AN AFFIDAVIT AND LEAVE APPROVAL ADVISE . THE ASSESSEE HAS EXPLAINED THAT THE RELEVANT OFFICER IN CHARGE OF THE TAX MATTERS WAS ON LEAVE AND THEREAFTER ON JOINING HE WENT OUT OUTSIDE MUMBAI FOR SOME OFFICE WORK WHICH LED TO SKIPPING OF THE ATTENTION . THE LEARNED CIT(A) REJECTED THE CONDONATION APPLICATION AND DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AT THRESHOLD ON TECHNICAL GROUNDS OF DELAY IN FILING OF APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEYOND TIME STIPULATED U/S 249(2) OF THE 1961 ACT AS WELL ON GROUNDS THAT AN ALTERNATIVE REMEDY IS BEING AVAILED BY THE ASSESSEE BY WAY OF RECTIFICATION APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT. I N OUR CONSIDER ED VIEW , THE ASSESSEE HAS SHOWN SUFFICIENT CAUSE FOR FILING AN APPEAL LATE BY 40 DAYS BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) AND THE SAID DELAY OUGHT TO HAVE BEEN CONDONED BY LEARNED CIT(A) , MORE SO THE ASSESSEE IS I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 13 VIGILANT AS IT IMMEDIATELY AVAILED REMEDY OF FILING AN RECTIFICATION APPLICATION U/S 154 OF THE 1961 ACT ON RECEIPT OF INTIMATION OF PROCESSING OF RETURN OF INCOME U/S 143(1) OF THE 1961 ACT ELECTRONICALLY BY EMAIL . THUS WE IN EXERCISE OF OUR POWER S WITH A VIEW TO RENDER SUBSTANTIAL JUSTICE , CONDONE THE DELAY WITH RESPECT TO THE FILING OF APPEAL BY ASSESSE E LATE BY 40 DAYS WITH L D. CIT(A) AND DIRECT LD. CIT(A) TO ADMIT APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE . W E ARE SET TING ASIDE APPELLATE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) AND RESTORE THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL BACK TO THE FILE OF THE LD. CIT(A) FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION OF ALL THE ISSUE ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW . N EEDLESS TO SAY THAT LD. CIT(A) SHALL GRANT PROPER AN D ADEQUATE OPPORTUNITY OF BEING HEARD TO THE ASSESSEE IN ACCORDANCE WITH PRINCIPLES OF NATURAL JUSTICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE LD. CIT(A) SHALL ALLOW THE ASSESSEE TO F ILE EVIDENCES WHICH SHALL BE ADMITTED BY LEARNED CIT(A) AND ADJUDICATED ON MERITS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO APPEAR BEFORE LEARNED CIT(A) FORTHWITH ON RECEIPT OF THIS ORDER AND FILE NECESSARY EVIDENCE TO JUSTIFY CLAIM OF DEDUCTIO N U/S 80P OF THE 1961 ACT AS THE ONUS IS ON THE ASSESSEE TO JUSTIFY THAT ITS CLAIM FALLS WITHIN FOUR CORNERS OF PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80P. WE WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT WE HAVE NOT COMMENTED ON THE MERITS OF THE ISSUE S IN THIS APPEAL. WE ORDER ACCORDINGL Y. 6 . IN THE RESULT, T HE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED FOR THE STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 0 7 .0 9 .2018 0 7 .0 9 .2018 S D / - S D / - (MAHAVIR SINGH) (RAMIT KOCHAR) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MUMBAI, DATED: 0 7 .0 9 .2018 NISHANT VERMA SR. PRIVATE SECRETARY I.T.A. NO.2153/MUM/2017 14 COPY TO 1 . THE APPELLANT 2 . THE RESPONDENT 3 . THE CIT(A) CONCERNED, MUMBAI 4 . THE CIT - CONCERNED, MUMBAI 5 . THE DR BENCH, 6 . MASTER FILE // TUE COPY// BY ORDER DY/ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT, MUMBAI