HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT HYDERABAD FOR THE STATE OF TELANGANA AND THE STATE OF ANDHRA PRADESH THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A. No. 353 of 2014 Date: 12.06.2014 Between:
Commissioner of Income Tax-II, IT Towers, AC Guards, Hyderabad.
… Appellant And M/s.ICSA (India) Limited, Plot No.12, 1st floor, Software Units Layout, Cyberabad, Hyderabad.
… Respondent This Court made the following:
THE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE SRI KALYAN JYOTI SENGUPTA AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE SANJAY KUMAR I.T.T.A. No. 353 of 2014 JUDGMENT: (Per the Hon’ble The Chief Justice Sri Kalyan Jyoti Sengupta) This appeal is sought to be preferred and admitted against the judgment and order of the learned Tribunal dated 22.1.2014 in relation to the assessment year 2009-10.
We have heard Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, learned counsel for the appellant, and he wants that this appeal should be admitted on the following suggested questions of law:
(i) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Tribunal (ITAT) is correct in law in declining to entertain the ground of the appeal raised by the Revenue with regard to granting of deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, when the respondent-assessee failed to comply the requirement under proviso to Section 10A(1A) of the Act merely the said issue was not a ground in the appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ignoring the fact that the appeal before the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) was by the respondent-assessee but not by the Revenue?
(ii) In the facts and circumstances of the case, whether the Tribunal (ITAT) is correct in law in upholding the claim under Section 10A of the Act when the respondent-assessee did not comply the requirement under proviso to Section 10A (1A) of the Act?
After hearing the learned counsel for the appellant and going through the impugned judgment and order of the learned Tribunal, the undisputed fact is that the assessee claimed exemption under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the returns. However, supporting document could not be filed at the time of the assessment. Hence, the claim for exemption was disallowed. The matter was taken to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), before whom at the time of hearing of the appeal, necessary certificate was produced. Therefore, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who received the document, remanded the matter to the file of the Assessing Officer with a direction to take note of the certificate and examine the veracity of the same and grant exemption.
The question was whether at the appellate stage any document could be received by the appellate authority or not.
The learned counsel for the appellant, Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, is not disputing that in a fit case on production of genuine and valid certificate, exemption can be granted.
In our view, the appellate authority has co-extensive power with that of the Assessing Officer and the principle of Order 41 Rule 27 of the Code of Civil Procedure for receiving additional evidence is to be applied indeed rightly applied. When a document was received and it was sent back for consideration to the authority below, it is a lawful exercise of power and there is no other issue.
However, Mr. B. Narasimha Sarma, the learned counsel for the appellant, wants to make it an issue with the aforesaid suggested question of law taking advantage of redundant recording of the Tribunal in paragraphs 5 and 6 of the impugned judgment. We are of the view that recording of the above paragraphs is surplasage and unnecessary. Therefore, those two paragraphs 5 and 6 of the impugned judgment are deemed to have been deleted as the core issue has been decided by the Tribunal. We accordingly affirm the impugned judgment.
The appeal is accordingly is dismissed. There will be no order as to costs.
K.J. SENGUPTA, CJ SANJAY KUMAR, J Dt. 12.06.2014 GBS/bnr