Loading judgment…
No AI summary yet for this case.
Detected automatically from the text. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “SMC” BENCH, MUMBAI
Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO
सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 21.06.2016 घोषणा की तायीख /Date of Pronouncement : 21.06.2016 आदेश / O R D E R
PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM:
This appeal filed by the assessee on 16.12.2014 is against the order of the CIT (A)-34, Mumbai dated 20.8.2014 for the assessment year 2009-2010. In this appeal, assessee raised the following solitary ground which reads as under:- “The Ld CIT (A) erred in confirming the disallowance of claim of deduction amounting to Rs. 1,59,136/- u/s 80IB made by the Ld AO which was claimed by the assessee at the time of filing of return of income.”
At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee mentioned that there is a delay of 29 days in filing the appeal before the Tribunal. In this regard, he brought my attention to the application for condonation of delay and the affidavit dated 9.7.2014 and mentioned that there is a reasonable and sufficient reason for not filing the appeal before the Tribunal within the prescribed time. Relevant portion from the said application for condanation of delay dated 16.12. 2014 reads as under:- “4. All the papers were ready for filing and were given to our Chief Accountant, Mr. Mahesh Shah who entrusted to get this appeal filed. He sent all the papers to the Chartered Accountant M/s. Rakesh V Panchmatia & Co. whose mother was unfortunately expired on 4.9.2014 and was highly irregular in office resulted into delay of 28 days. The applicant therefore, is filing the present appeal before your honors with the prayer to condone the delay of 28 days in filing the same and the appeal may be heard on merit.”
On perusal of the above explanation of the assessee in respect of the delay of 29 days, I find, there is a sufficient and reasonable cause which restrained the assessee in filing the appeal before the Tribunal within the prescribed time limit. Considering the same, I condone the delay and proceed to adjudicate the appeal on merits.
At the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee brought my attention above ground and mentioned that the only issue involved in this appeal relates to the disallowance of claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act. In this regard, Ld Counsel for the assessee briefly narrated the facts of the case and brought my attention to the order of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case vide (AY 2007-2008), dated 3.6.2014 and another order of the Tribunal in ITA Nos.2435/M/2015, dated 17.10.2014 and submitted that similar issue ie the allowability of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act in respect of DEPB / duty draw back and interest on FDRs were adjudicated by the Tribunal and the same covers to the issues raised in the present appeal. Further, drawing my attention to above grounds of appeal
, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that in the AY under consideration also disallowance of deduction amounting to Rs. 1,59,136/- u/s 80IB of the Act is the only issue and the same stands covered against the assessee as the said amount consists of above mentioned three kinds of receipts ie interest income; DEPB and duty draw back.
5. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the cited decisions of the Tribunal (supra) in the assessee’s own case, I am of the opinion the issue raised in the present appeal stands covered against the assessee in view of the Hon’ble Apex Court judgment in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT, 317 ITR 218 (SC). Accordingly, the decision taken by the CIT (A) vide para 3 and its sub-paras is confirmed. Thus, the ground raised by the assessee is dismissed.