M/S. ADDISPLAY EQUIPMENT PVT. LTD.,GURGAON vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

1(i) That on the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) was not justified in not accepting claim of statutory deduction u/s. 80IB even though claim is in conformity with past history. (ii) That finding and conclusion of CIT(A) is without proper appreciation of facts and opportunity to the appellant. 2. That on the facts and circumstances of the case, CIT(A) was not justified in sustaining disallowance of commission income amounting to Rs. 15,34,628/- even though the claim is wholly and exclusively for the purpose of business and fully supported and substantiated.

Facts narrated by the revenue authorities are not disputed by both the parties, hence, the same are not repeated here for the sake of convenience.

At the time of hearing, Ld. Counsel of the assessee has stated that Revenue authorities has not given sufficient opportunity to the assessee for substantiating its claim before them. He requested that the assessee is having all the necessary evidence which can be produced before the AO, if this Bench granted an opportunity to the assessee. He has filed the Paper Book containing pages 1 to 77 in which he has attached the copy of written submission before the CIT(A); copy of assessment order for AY 2002-03; calculation fo proportionate benefit u/s. 80IB; Computation of income for AY 2002- 03; Audited Balance sheet as on 31.3.2003; copy of letter before AO dated 6.1.2006; Copy of letter before AO dated 24.1.2006; copy of letter before AO dated 24.2.2006; Details of commission paid with name and address, confirmation, copy of ITR alongwith balance sheet and P&L A/c; copy of letter of Intent; copies of correspondence; copy of ledger of Rapid Scan (Comm.) A/c alongwith TDS Certificate; Details of printing on raw materials alongwith ledger, TDS certificates and bills and details of Consultancy charges alongwith copy of accounts, TDS certificates, bills and sales invoices. He requested that issue in dispute may be set aside to the AO for fresh consideration.

On the contrary, Ld. DR relied upon the orders of the authorities below and opposed the request of the assessee’s counsel.

I have heard both the parties and carefully gone through the orders passed by the authorities below as well as the Paper Books detailing the evidences/documents, I am of the view that the evidences produced by the assessee requires thorough examination at the level of the AO. Therefore, in the interest of justice, I set aside the issues in dispute to the file of the AO for fresh consideration, as per law, after considering all the documentary evidences. However, the assessee is directed to fully cooperate with the AO during the proceedings before him and not to take any unnecessary adjournment in the case and also produce all the necessary evidences before the AO to substantiate his claim.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes.