O/Taxap/1642/2005 Judgment v. O/Taxap/1642/2005 Judgment

O/TAXAP/1642/2005 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 1642 of 2005 FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER ================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ?judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ?to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX....Appellant(s)Versus GREEN PHARMACEUTICALS....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR.VARUN K.PATEL, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR HM TALATI, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1MR TEJ SHAH, ADVOCATE for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER Date : 07/11/2014 ORAL JUDGMENT (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI) 1.By way of this appeal, the appellant has challenged the judgment and order dated 3.3.2005 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench ‘C’ in ITA No. 3938/Ahd/2004 for AY 2001-02. 2.While admitting this appeal, this Court has framed the following substantial question of law: “Whether the appellate tribunal is right in law and on facts in confirming the order passed by the CIT(Appeals) directing the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s. 80IA when the assessee had failed to furnish the audit report along with the return of income, though the same was furnished only during the assessment proceedings, despite the clear provisions of section 80IA(7) of the Act ? 3.The facts of the present case are that the assessee had claimed deduction of Rs. 12,64,355/- u/s. 80IA @ 25% on total income. However, on verification, it is seen that the assessee has not furnished audited report in Form No. 10CCB along with the return of income as provided in sub sec. (7) to sec. 80IA of the Act. As the audited report in Form No. 10CCB was not filed by the assessee, as per the provisions of sub-sec. (7) to sec. 80IA, they were requested to explain as to why the claim of deduction under sec.80IA should not be disallowed, and ultimately, assessee’s claim of deduction under sec. 80IA has been rejected, against which, Appeal preferred by the assessee before the Commissioner of Income-Tax (Appeals), has been allowed. Against the order of CIT(A), the revenue has preferred an appeal before the ITAT, Ahmedabad, which came to be dismissed. Hence, the present Tax Appeal. 4.Heard the learned advocates appearing for the parties and considered the submissions made on behalf of the respective parties. The issue involved in the present Tax Appeal is covered by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-Tax v. Gujarat Oil and allied Industries, reported in 201 ITR 325 and the proposition of law is not disputed by both the sides, and therefore, the present appeal requires to be dismissed. Hence, we are not giving any elaborate reasonings and the question is answered against the appellant – Revenue and in favour of the respondent-Assessee. The present Tax Appeal is dismissed. mandora (K.S.JHAVERI, J.) (K.J.THAKER, J)