M/s Indfrag Limited, Bengaluru V. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle-3(1)(1) , Bengaluru

MA 122/BANG/2019

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 112 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3952 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 28-11-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 13-09-2019
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R PREMI
• Assessee Lawyers: S RAMASUBRAMANIAM

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI ARUN KUMAR GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI PAVAN KUMAR GADALE, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NO. 122/BANG/2019 (IN ITA NO. 98 / BANG/201 8 ) ASSESSMENT YEAR : 20 1 4 - 1 5 M/S. INDFRAG LTD., 15, SERVICE ROAD, HAL II STAGE, BANGALORE 560 008. PAN: AAACI0929H VS. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE 3 (1) (1), BANGALORE. APPELLANT RESPONDENT ASSESSEE BY : SHRI S. RAMASUBRAMANIAM, CA REVENUE BY : SMT. R. PREMI, JCIT (DR) DATE OF HEARING : 15 . 1 1 .2019 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 . 1 1 .2019 O R D E R PER SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THIS M.P. IS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS STATED IN THE M.P. THAT GROUND NOS. 3 AND 4 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 IN ITA NO. 98/BANG/2018 WERE NOT DECIDED AS PER THE IMPUGNED TRIBUNAL ORDER AND HENCE, THIS IS AN APPARENT MISTAKE WHICH SHOULD BE RECTIFIED. THE LD. DR OF REVENUE HAD NOTHING TO SAY. 2. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. FIRST OF ALL, WE REPRODUCE GROUND NOS. 3 AND 4 RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15 IN ITA NO. 98/BANG/2018. THESE GROUNDS ARE AS UNDER. 3. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN RESTRICTING THE DEDUCTION U/S 35(2AB) OF THE ACT TO THE AMOUNT MENTIONED IN FORM 3CL INSTEAD OF ALLOWING THE FULL EXPENDITURE INCURRED BY THE APPELLANT AS MANDATED U/S 35(2AB) OF THE ACT. 4. THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED A DEDUCTION OF RS. 5,21,40,716 U/S 35(2AB) OF THE ACT. M.P. NO. 122/BANG/2019 (IN ITA NO. 98/BANG/2018) PAGE 2 OF 2 3. WE FIND THAT AS PER THE IMPUGNED ORDER, THESE TWO GROUNDS WERE IN FACT NOT DECIDED BY THE TRIBUNAL INADVERTENTLY AND HENCE, WE RECALL THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE FOR DECIDING THESE TWO GROUNDS AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THIS APPEAL FOR HEARING FOR THIS LIMITED PURPOSE ON3012.2019. SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT, NO SEPARATE NOTICE OF HEARING IS REQUIRED TO BE ISSUED. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE M.P. FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE. SD/- SD/- (PAVAN KUMAR GADALE) (ARUN KUMAR GARODIA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 28 TH NOVEMBER, 2019. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 4. CIT(A) 2. RESPONDENT 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE 3. CIT 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BANGALORE.