The Issue Involved In The Present Appeal Is Now Not Res Integra In View Of The Recent Decision Of The Division Bench Of This Court In The Case Of Pr. Commission v. Kiran Industries P. Ltd., In Tax Integra In View Of The Recent Decision Of The Division Bench Of This Court In The Case Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Surat

C/TAXAP/787/2018 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 787 of 2018 =========================================================== PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER INCOMETAX, SURAT-2VersusM/S VARDHMAN FASHIONS PVT LTD ================================================================ Appearance: MRS KALPANA K RAVAL(1046) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAHandHONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE Date : 09/07/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgment and order dated 09.01.2018 passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Ahmedabad in ITA No.3660/Ahd./2015 for the Assessment Year : 2012-2013, the Revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed substantial questions of law :- “(A) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon’ble ITAT is justified in upholding the decision of ld. CIT(A) deleting the disallowance of Rs.68,10,188/- u/s. 80IA of the Act made by the AO when the assessee could not furnish audit report in prescribed form 10CCB? (B) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon’ble ITAT failed to appreciate the fact that assessee was statutorily required electronically file audit report in form 10CCB before due date for filing return of income as mandated in proviso to Rule 12(2) of Income tax Rules, 1962? (C) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, Hon’ble ITAT wrongly relied upon two Hon’ble High Court judgments which were delivered in 1992 and 1995 in the context of section 80J whereas the instant case pertained to section 80IA applicable with effect from 01.04.2000?” 2. The assessee filed its return of income for the Assessment Year : 2012-2013 on 28.09.2012 declaring total income at Rs.50,93,730/-. That the Assessing Officer completed the assessment proceedings determining the total income at Rs.1,20,19,371/= after making disallowance of Rs.68,10,188/= under Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act and also making disallowance of Rs.1,15,451/= being 20% expenses out of office, telephone, travelling and conveyance and motor car expenses claimed by the assessee. That the Assessing Officer noted and found that Audit Report in Form No.10CCB relating to claim of deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act was not furnished alongwith the return of income. 3. However, at this stage, it is required to be noted that and it is not in dispute that during the assessment and it is not in dispute that during the assessment proceedings, the assessee did file the mandatory Form No.10CCB for claiming deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. In an Appeal filed by the assessee, considering the decision of this Court, the learned CIT (Appeals) held that the assessee did filed the Form No.10CCB for claiming deduction under Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act during the assessment proceedings. The Assessing Officer was not justified in making disallowance of the deduction claimed under Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act and consequently deleted the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer of the deduction of Rs.68,10,188/- under Section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act. 4. The Revenue was unsuccessful before the learned ITAT. Hence, the Revenue is before this Court by way of the present Appeal with the aforesaid proposed questions of law. Hence, the Revenue is before this Court by way of the present Appeal with the aforesaid proposed questions of law. 4. The Revenue was unsuccessful before the learned ITAT. Hence, the Revenue is before this Court by way of the present Appeal with the aforesaid proposed questions of law. Hence, the Revenue is before this Court by way of the present Appeal with the aforesaid proposed questions of law. 5. The issue involved in the present Appeal is now not res integra in view of the recent decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat 1 vs. Kiran Industries P. Ltd., in Tax integra in view of the recent decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax, Surat 1 vs. Kiran Industries P. Ltd., in Tax Appeal No.893/2017. A similar question is answered against the revenue and in favour of the assessee. Paragraph 4 of the said decision reads as under :- “4. This Court has repeatedly taken a view that filing of audited accounts in the prescribed format is a procedural requirement and as long as during the assessment the same has been complied with, the deduction cannot be disallowed. Several other High Courts have taken a similar view. In Tax Appeal No.662 of 2017 vide an order dated 13.09.2017, this Court had referring to the judgments in case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gujarat Oil and Allied Industries reported in 201 ITR 325 and in case of Panasonic Energy India Co. Ltd. v. Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax reported in (2014) 367 ITR 245 (Guj), expressed such a view. 6. In view of the above, and as the issue involved in the present Appeal is now not res integra and as the same is covered against the Revenue, no substantial question of law arises in the present Appeal. present Appeal is now not res integra and as the same is covered against the Revenue, no substantial question of law arises in the present Appeal. 7. Under the circumstances, the present Appeal deserves to be dismissed and is hereby, dismissed. to be dismissed and is hereby, dismissed. Sd/-(M.R. SHAH, J) Sd/-(A.Y. KOGJE, J)