For Full Access To All Latest Judgments on Income Tax
Click Here To Subscribe Now
Take a tour of our Income-Tax Library

n the instant case, AO vide his order dated 29.11.2013 u/s. 154 of the Act disallowed deduction of 22,70,984/- u/s. 80-IB of the Act on the allegation that subsequently it revealed that the Assessee claimed excess deduction and Ld. CIT(A) in appeal has restricted the disallowance of deduction u/s. 80-IB of the Act to the amount claimed at 5,67,746/-. In view of above, we are of the considered view that the AO made the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act and took a conscious and considered view to allow deduction u/s. 80IB of the At in respect of interest from debtors and fixed deposits with Banks; and therefore, now the same cannot be said to be mistake apparent from record; this is clear case of change of opinion; the order does not even mention the nature of amount disallowed; the order does not show any basis, reason or logic to arrive at a conclusion that deduction allowed u/s. 80IB of the Act is mistake apparent from record much less patent and glaring; the assessment order does not point any mistake of fact or application of any law. Held that— in our view there is no mistake apparent on record rectifiable u/s. 154 of the Act, therefore, we quash the orders of the authorities below and allow the deduction in dispute u/s. 80IB of the Act in respect of the interest received from debtors and on fixed deposit with banks. Accordingly, the grounds no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee are allowed.

Shanti Prime Publication Pvt. Ltd.

Section 80IB, 154 of Income tax Act, 1961—Disallowance of deduction u/s 80IB—In the instant case, AO vide his order dated 29.11.2013 u/s. 154 of the Act disallowed deduction of 22,70,984/- u/s. 80-IB of the Act on the allegation that subsequently it revealed that the Assessee claimed excess deduction and Ld. CIT(A) in appeal has restricted the disallowance of deduction u/s. 80-IB of the Act to the amount claimed at 5,67,746/-.

In view of above, we are of the considered view that the AO made the assessment u/s. 143(3) of the Act and took a conscious and considered view to allow deduction u/s. 80IB of the At in respect of interest from debtors and fixed deposits with Banks; and therefore, now the same cannot be said to be mistake apparent from record; this is clear case of change of opinion; the order does not even mention the nature of amount disallowed; the order does not show any basis, reason or logic to arrive at a conclusion that deduction allowed u/s. 80IB of the Act is mistake apparent from record much less patent and glaring; the assessment order does not point any mistake of fact or application of any law.

Held that— in our view there is no mistake apparent on record rectifiable u/s. 154 of the Act, therefore, we quash the orders of the authorities below and allow the deduction in dispute u/s. 80IB of the Act in respect of the interest received from debtors and on fixed deposit with banks. Accordingly, the grounds no. 2 & 3 raised by the assessee are allowed. Our aforesaid view is fortified by the decision of the Hon’ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Krishak Bharti Co-operative Ltd. (2004) 266 ITR 208 (Del.)[M/S SUNLAND ALLOYS, C/O SB GARG AND CO. VERSUS ACIT, CIRCLE 63 (1) , NEW DELHI] [2018] [7] [ITCD Online] [28] [ITAT DELHI]