SH. SURINDER MALIK vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/1113/2017HC DelhiDLHC01442450201706 February 2018Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA2 pages
AI SummaryAllowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court directed the ITAT to reconsider the remitted issues itself, rather than sending it back to the Assessing Officer, to avoid further delays.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80IA(10) of the Income Tax Act. The ITAT, while acknowledging eligibility, remitted the quantum of profits to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT was correct in remitting the quantum of deduction under Section 80IA(10) to the AO, or if it should have decided the issue itself.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IA(10),Section 80IA(8)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

$~4 * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA 1113/2017 and CM APPLS.44222-44223/2017

SH. SURINDER MALIK

..... Appellant Through Mr. Y.K. Kapur, Mr. A.K. Mehta and Mr. Amit Kumar Singh, Advs.

versus

ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel and Mr. Deepak Anand, Jr. Standing Counsel.

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE A. K. CHAWLA

O R D E R %

06.02.2018

Issue notice. Mr. Zoheb Hossain, ld. Sr. Standing Counsel accepts notice.

With the consent of the ld. counsel for the parties, the appeal was heard finally.

The assessee’s grievance is limited to the fact that Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) remitted question as to verification of quantum, which it is entitled to claim deduction of 80IA(10) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘the Act’). The findings recorded by the Authorities below i.e. CIT(A) and ITAT - after a remand order by the latter was that Section 80IA(8) was applicable. The CIT(A) rendered

findings based upon all the relevant materials, which favoured the assessee. The ITAT was of the opinion that although, the appellant’s eligibility for the benefit of Section 80IA stood established, nevertheless the question of quantum of profits allowable is required to be re-considered and remitted the matter for fresh consideration to the Assessing Officer (AO).

This Court, having regard to the circumstances, Assessment Year is 2006-07 and given that the matter had been remitted once previously, is of the opinion that the entire issue (upon which the remit has been directed) should be re-considered by the ITAT itself. If need be, it can obtain the necessary details from the AO, in accordance with law. The impugned order is accordingly modified. The ITAT is directed to consider for itself the issues that were remitted to the AO. The appeal is allowed in the above terms. All the pending applications also stand disposed off.

S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J

A. K. CHAWLA, J FEBRUARY 06, 2018 rc

More judgments on Section 80IA(10)

All 93 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IA(10) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →