Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Kolkata

Bengal Peerless Housing Development ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 14 March, 2013

                  आयकर अपीलीय अधीकरण, Ûयायपीठ - "बी ", कोलकाता,
     IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, BENCH "B", KOLKATA

       [(सम¢) ौी पी.
                  पी.के.बंसल,
                           ल, लेखा सदःय, एवं ौी जाज[ माथन Ûयायीक सदःय]]
       [Before Hon'ble Sri P.K.Bansal, AM & Hon'ble Sri George Mathan, JM]
                       आयकर अपील संÉया /ITA No.1484/Kol/2012
                        िनधॉरण वषॅ/Assessment Year : 2006-07
     (अपीलाथȸ/APPELLANT )              -वनाम-            (ू×यथȸ/RESPONDENT)
A.C.I.T., Circle-7                                 M/s.Bengal Peerless Housing
Kolkata                             -versus-       Development Company Ltd.
                                                   Kolkata (PAN:AABCB 3038P)



       अपीलाथȸ कȧ ओर से/ For the Appellant:                       Shri A.K.Mahapatra,
                                                                  CIT(DR)
        ू×यथȸ कȧ ओर से/For the Respondent:                        Shri K.K.Goswami,
                                                                  Advocate.
सुनवाई कȧ तारȣख/Date of Hearing : 14.03.2013
घोषणा कȧ तारȣख/Date of Pronouncement : 14.03.2013
                                      आदे श/ORDER

Per Bench This is an appeal filed by the Revenue against the order of ld. C.I.T.(A)-VIII, Kolkata in Appeal No.300/CIT(A)-VIII/Kol/08-09 dated 11.07.2012 for the Assessment year 2006-07.

2. Shri A.K.Mahapatra, CIT(DR) represented on behalf of the Revenue and Shri K.K.Goswami represented on behalf of the assessee.

3. In the Revenue's appeal the Revenue has raised the following ground :-

"That under the facts and circumstances of the case, the ld. CIT(Appeals)-VIII, Kolkata, has erred in law as well as in facts in allowing the claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act at Rs.7,45,43,412 as against Rs.6,02,85,303 claimed in the return of income."

4. It was submitted by the ld.DR that in the course of assessment the assessee had originally made a claim u/s 80IB of the IT Act for an amount of Rs.6,02,85,303/-.

However, in the course of assessment the assessee revised the claim to Rsd.7,45,43,412/- stating that it was a clerical mistake and as per Form No.10CCB report the claim was Rs.7,45,43,412/-. However, the AO had not accepted the contention of assessee on the ground that no revised return has been filed. It was the submission that on appeal the ld. CIT(A) following the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. reported in 284 ITR 323 directed the AO adopt the figure of Rs.7,45,43,412/- as per Form No.10CCB. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the AO to allow the higher claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the IT Act. It was the submission that as the AO had not allowed the claim of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act on the basis of Form No.10CCB report the AO did not get an opportunity to verify the claim of deduction u/s 80IB(10) of the Act. It was the submission that order of the ld. CIT(A) is liable to be reversed.

5. In reply the ld. AR submitted that Form No.10CCB clarified the actual deduction u/s 80IB(10) at Rs.7,45,43,412/- and adopting of the figure of Rs.6,02,85,303/- was only a clerical error. It was the submission that the ld. CIT(A) was right in directing the AO to allow the deduction u/s 80IB as per Form No.10CCB.

6. We have considered the rival submissions. A perusal of the order of ld. CIT(A) clearly shows that the ld.CIT(A) has applied the judgement of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. and has directed that the claim of deduction u/s 80IB may be allowed at Rs.7,45,43,412/-. We are of the view that there is no error in the order of ld. CIT(A) in following the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetz India Ltd. referred to supra. It is also an accepted fact that the ld. CIT(A) cannot set aside this issue to the file of AO for re-adjudication. However, considering the submissions of the ld. DR we are of the view that this issue must be restored to the file of AO for verification as to whether the actual claim as per Form No.10CCB report is Rs.7,45,43,412/-. If Form NO.10CCB report shows that the claim of deduction u/s 80IB is Rs.7,45,43,412/- the same is liable to be allowed. With this direction this issue is restored to the file of AO for re-adjudication. In the circumstances the appeal of the revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

7. In the result the appeal of the Revenue is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open court on 14.03.2013.

               Sd/-                                                   Sd/-
 [ौी पी.के.बंसल,, लेखा सदःय ]                            [ौी.जाज[ माथन, Ûयायीक सदःय ]
[P.K.Bansal]                                              [ George Mathan ]
 Accountant Member                                              Judicial Member

(तारȣख)
 तारȣख)Date: 14.03.2013.

R.G.(.P.S.)
          आदे श कȧ ूितिलǒप अमेǒषतः-
          Copy of the order forwarded to:

1. M/s.Bengal Peerless Housing Development Company Limited, 6/1A, Moira Street, "Mangal Deep" Gr.Foor, Kolkata-700017.

2 The A.C.I.T., Circle-7, Kolkata.

3. CIT Kolkata 4. CIT(A)- VIII, Kolkata.

5. DR, Kolkata Benches, Kolkata स×याǒपत ूित/True Copy, आदे शानुसार/ By order, Deputy /Asst. Registrar, ITAT, Kolkata Benches