| |
| The Tax Publishers2021 TaxPub(DT) 1537 (Del-Trib) INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 35(2AB)
Assessee had submitted all the documents necessary to prove claim of deduction under section 35(2AB) such as Form 3CK for entering into an agreement with DSIR for R&D facility along with audit statement and later issued by DSIR stating recognition of In-House R&D units from 31-3-2012 to 31-3-2015 and thereafter till 31-3-2018 and upto 31-3-2021. From the perusal of said certificates, it could be seen the year under consideration was covered under the certificates issued by the DSIR wherein approval had been duly granted. The communication in Form 3CL was thereafter, between prescribed authority and the department. If same was not so surely, assessee could not be made to suffer.
|
Business deduction under section 35(2AB) - Scientific research expenditure - Allowability - Non-submission of Form 3CL
Assessee a recognized in-house research and development (RD) center approved by claimed deduction under section 35(2AB). AO disallowed deduction on the ground that assessee failed to submit Form 3CL which as per AO was a pre-requisitie for claiming of deduction under section 35(2AB). Held: Assessee had submitted all the documents necessary to prove claim of deduction under section 35(2AB) such as Form 3CK for entering into an agreement with DSIR for R&D facility along with audit statement and later issued by DSIR stating recognition of In-House R&D units from 31-3-2012 to 31-3-2015 and thereafter till 31-3-2018 and upto 31-3-2021. From the perusal of said certificates, it could be seen the year under consideration was covered under the certificates issued by the DSIR wherein approval had been duly granted. The communication in Form 3CL was thereafter, between prescribed authority and the department. If same was not so surely, assessee could not be made to suffer. Revenue could disallow claim of assessee if it could prove that claim of assessee was wrong after obtaining the report in Form 3CL from the concerned authority. Matter was remanded.
Relied:Century Seeds (P) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [ITA No. 942/Hyd./2017, dated 20-7-2018] : 2018 TaxPub(DT) 5223 (Hyd-Trib), Dy. CIT v. Famy Care Ltd. on the same facts, the Tribunal in the case of Efftronics Systems (P) Ltd. v. Asstt. CIT [ITA No. 216/Viza/2015] : 2016 TaxPub(DT) 4890 (Visakha-Trib), Mahindra & Mahindra Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [ITA No. 8597/Mum/2010 Order, dated 6-6-2012] : 2014 TaxPub(DT) 1869 (Mum-Trib).
REFERRED :
FAVOUR : Matter remanded.
A.Y. : 2014-15
INCOME TAX ACT, 1961
Section 254(1)
 SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT
|