CIT v. Central Provinces Manganese Ore Co. Ltd.

DCIT, New Delhi vs. Sh. Shyam Sunder Khemka, New Delhi

In the result, appeal filed the Revenue is dismissed

Bench: Sh. H.S. Sidhu & Sh. O.P. Kantassessment Year: 2009-10 Dcit, Circle-5(1), Room No. Vs. Sh. Shyam Sunder Khemka, 409A, C.R. Building, I.P. E-292, Sarita Vihar, New Estate, New Delhi Delhi Gir/Pan :Aanpk9254H (Appellant) (Respondent) Appellant By Smt. Anima Barnwal, Sr.Dr Respondent By Dr. Rakesh Gupta & Sh. Somil Aggarwal, Advocates Date Of Hearing 29.06.2016 Date Of Pronouncement 29.07.2016 Order Per O.P. Kant, A.M.: This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against Order Dated 18/07/2013 Of Learned Commissioner Of Income-Tax (Appeals)-Vii, New Delhi For Assessment Year 2009-10, Raising Following Grounds: I. Whether In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Allowing 100% Deduction U/S 80Ic Instead Of 25% By Considering Return Of Income Which Was Filed After Due Date U/S 139(5) Of The It Act? Ii. Whether In The Facts & Circumstances Of The Case, The Ld. Cit(A) Erred In Accepting The Additional Evidence

…because the assessee fails to claim the benefit of a set-off, it cannot relieve the Income-tax Officer of his duty to apply section 24 (set off of loss etc) in an appropriate case. Hon’ble Bombay High Court held in the case of Central Provinces Manganese Ore 112 ITR 734 held 15 AY: 2009-10 that the mere fact that such a deduction was not claimed before the Income-tax Officer is not of much importance, if the liability arises then a claim can be made bona fide at any stage before the higher authority, who is competent to grant relief. Hon’ble Allahabad High Court held in the case of CIT vs. Lucknow Public Educat…