M/S METAHELIX LIFE SCIENCES LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-4(1)(2), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1260/BANG/2017Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore17 January 2018AY 2013-148 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the Assessing Officer erred by restricting the deduction under Section 35(2AB) based on the DSIR report, as this requirement is not mandated by Section 35(2AB) itself. The matter was remanded for fresh examination.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) for R&D expenditure. The Assessing Officer disallowed a portion of this claim, restricting it to the amount mentioned in the DSIR report. The CIT(Appeals) upheld the AO's decision.

What were the issues?

Whether the Assessing Officer was correct in restricting the weighted deduction under Section 35(2AB) to the amount mentioned in the DSIR report, or if the AO should have independently assessed the entire expenditure.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 35(2AB),Section 35(2B)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, BANGALORE BENCH ‘ C ’

Before: SHRI JASON P BOAZ & SHRI LALIT KUMAR

For Appellant: Shri V. Sridhar, Advocate
4.

In the result, the assessee's appeals for Assessment Years 2012-13 and 2013-14 are allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced in the open court on the 17th day of Jan., 2018.

Sd/- Sd/- (LALIET KUMAR) (JASON P BOAZ) Judicial Member Accountant Member Bangalore, Dt.17.01.2018. *Reddy gp Copy to : 1 Appellant 4 CIT(A) 2 Respondent 5 DR. ITAT, Bangalore 3 CIT 6 Guard File

Senior Private Secretary Income Tax Appellate Tribunal Bangalore.

More judgments on Section 35(2AB)

All 842 judgments and leading authorities on Section 35(2AB) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →