Dy. CIT v. National Bank for Agriculture & Rural Development. (2023) 221 TTJ 25 / 221 DTR 369 (Mum) (Trib)

S. 35 : Expenditure on scientific research-Weighted deduction-Unpaid amounts as expenditure-Disallowance is affirmed.[S. 2(24), 35(2AB), 36(1)(xii)]

Held that the CBDT, being the authority issuing notification, has itself stated that the assessee is recognized u/s 36(1)(xii) of the Act from AY 2013-14 onwards. In the decisions relied on by the assessee, it was the assessing officer, who had disallowed the claim for non-approval of scientific research facility. Hence it was a question of interpretation of the provisions of sec.35(2AB) of the Act. That is the not the case here. When the notifying authority itself has mentioned that the assessee is being notified from AY 2013-14 onwards, the assessee cannot be deemed to have been notified in the year under consideration, being AY 2010-11. Accordingly, we confirm the disallowance made by the AO. (AY. 2010-11)