PCIT v. Schaeffler India Ltd. [2023] 155 taxmann.com 651 /(2024) 296 Taxman 210 (Guj)(HC)

S. 263 : Commissioner-Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue-
Expenditure on scientific research-Form 3CL filed but delay in intimation-Commissioner passed the revision order-Order of Tribunal quashing the Revision order is affirmed. [S. 35(2AB), 260A, Form No. 3CL]

The Assessee claimed deduction u/s 35(2AB) but did not submit required evidence. Pr. CIT u/s 263 disallowed said deduction. Tribunal dismissed the order of the Pr. CIT. Revenue filed appeal. The Hon’ble Gujarat High Court observed that since the assessee has filed Form 3CL certifying his Research and Development (R&D) facility approved by the prescribed authority in proper format, merely because the authority failed to send the intimation during the course of assessment proceedings could not be the reason for denying the claim deduction under section 35(2AB) of the Act. It was held that The ITAT is correct in holding that the order of the A.O. is not erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of revenue. (AY. 2016-17)