{"id":17523,"date":"2021-05-01T15:32:39","date_gmt":"2021-05-01T10:02:39","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/sutures-india-pvt-ltd-v-cit-2021-431-itr-332-karnhc\/"},"modified":"2021-08-29T10:15:00","modified_gmt":"2021-08-29T04:45:00","slug":"sutures-india-pvt-ltd-v-cit-2021-431-itr-332-karnhc","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/sutures-india-pvt-ltd-v-cit-2021-431-itr-332-karnhc\/","title":{"rendered":"Sutures India Pvt. Ltd. v. CIT (2021) 431 ITR 332 \/ 278 Taxman 112(Karn)(HC)"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>Court held\u00a0 that the assessee had, filed form 10CCB of the Act with written submissions before the Commissioner, which was acknowledged by him in the order. The court in\u00a0CIT v. Ace Multitaxes Systems Ltd.\u00a0<a href=\"http:\/\/www.taxlawsonline.com\/%5b2009%5d%20317%20ITR%200207\">[2009] 317 ITR 207<\/a>\u00a0(Karn) (HC)\u00a0 had taken a view that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section\u00a080IA\u00a0of the Act even if the audit report is filed at the appellate stage. Similar view has been taken by the Madras High Court in A. N. Arunachalam. Thus, the view taken by the Assessing Officer with regard to eligibility of the assessee to claim deduction under section\u00a080IA\u00a0of the Act was one of the possible views. The order passed by the Commissioner itself disclosed that two views are possible. Hence the order of revision was not valid.( AY. 2003-04)<\/p>\n<p><strong>\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>S. 263 : Commissioner &#8211; Revision of orders prejudicial to revenue -Assessing Officer taking one of  two possible views on issue \u2014 Order not erroneous \u2014 Commissioner cannot set aside order .[ S.80IA, form 10CCB ] <\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":3,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"jetpack_post_was_ever_published":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[21],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-17523","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-income-tax-act"],"acf":[],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_shortlink":"https:\/\/wp.me\/p9S2Rw-4yD","jetpack-related-posts":[],"jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17523","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/3"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=17523"}],"version-history":[{"count":2,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17523\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":21205,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/17523\/revisions\/21205"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=17523"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=17523"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/digest\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=17523"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}