SHIVAM CONDEV PVT LTD,BHUBANESWAR vs. DCIT CIRCLE-1(1), CUTTACK

None appeared on behalf of the assessee even the case was called for the second round of hearing, however, the AR of the assessee has filed an adjournment application stating therein that he needs more time to prepare in the appeal. The appeal has been filed by the assessee on 17th April, 2023 and till now, the ld. AR seeks time to prepare in the 2 appeal. The reasons given being unsubstantiated, the adjournment application is rejected.

It was submitted by the ld.Sr. DR that the assessee has not produced evidence before the AO or the ld.CIT(A) in regard to the issue of deduction u/s.80IA of the Act and consequently no fresh evidence can also be produced before the Tribunal. It was the prayer that the order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be confirmed.

In regard to ITA No.127/CTK/2023 for the assessment year 20162017, it was submitted by the ld. DR that there is one extra ground in regard to the disallowance confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) in respect of 10% of the miscellaneous expenses. It was the submission that the AO had disallowed 10% on the ground that the bills and vouchers though produced showed that the substantial portion was incurred in cash and was supported by self-made bills and vouchers. It was also submitted that the bills and vouchers produced and the narrations were inadequate to show that all such expenses which are incurred was wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business. It was the submission that the order of the AO and that of the ld.CIT(A) on this ground is also liable to be upheld.

We have considered the submissions of ld. Sr. DR. In respect of the issue of deduction u/s.80IA of the Act, a perusal of the order of the ld. CIT(A) shows that he has confirmed the order of the AO on the ground that the copy of the agreement entered into by the assessee with the undertaking regarding the details of the infrastructure 3 developed/maintained by the assessee were not available. A perusal of the assessment order shows that the deduction has been denied on account of non-providing of the Form 10CCB. Admittedly the issue of the non-submission of the Form 10CCB has not been adjudicated by the ld. CIT(A). In this regard, as the ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated the issue in respect of 80IA of the Act claimed on account of the issues raised by the AO and has also taken the stand that the copy of the agreement entered into having not been produced by the assessee, in the interest of justice, this issue is restored to the file of ld. CIT(A) for readjudication after granting the assessee adequate opportunity to produce of such evidence as required to substantiate his claim.

In regard to the issue of adhoc disallowance of 10% out of the miscellaneous expenses claimed, it is noticed that the AO has not identified any specific bills or vouchers but has made an estimate disallowance. The estimate disallowance are not permitted under the Act. This being so the adhoc disallowance of 10% as made by the AO and confirmed by the ld. CIT(A) stands deleted.

In the result, all the four appeals of the assessee for the assessment years are partly allowed for statistical purposes. Order dictated and pronounced in the open court on 28/06/2023. (राजेश कुमार) (जाजज माथन) (RAJESH KUMAR) (GEORGE MATHAN) ऱेखा सदस्य/ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER कटक Cuttack; ददनाांक Dated 28/06/2023 Prakash Kumar Mishra, Sr.P.S.