Law:

Section:

Section 32AB of the Income-tax Act, 1961 - Investment deposit account - Assessment year 1988-89 - Assessing Officer allowed deduction under section 32AB to assessee-registered firm which was upheld by Tribunal - On instant appeal revenue contended that assessee was not entitled to deduction as it had failed to file audit report along with return - Whether filing of audit report along with return as contemplated under section 32AB(5) is only directory and not mandatory - Held, yes - Whether, therefore, no substantial question of law arose from Tribunal's order - Held, yes FACTS The assessee was a registered firm. While computing the income for the assessment year 1988-89, the Assessing Officer allowed the deduction under section 32AB. But, the Commissioner rectified the mistake under section 263 and directed the Assessing Officer to complete the assessment after withdrawing the investment allowances granted. The assessee preferred an appeal before the Tribunal, which set aside the order of the Commissioner. On instant appeal, the revenue contended that the assessee was not entitled to deduction, as the assessee failed to file the audit report along with the return, which was a mandatory requirement for claiming deduction under section 32AB(5). HELD The filing of the audit report along with the return, as contemplated under section 32AB(5) is only directory and not mandatory. Hence, finding no substantial question of law arising for consideration, the appeal was dismissed. Note : Decision was in favour of assessee. CASES REFERRED TO Cape Brandy Syndicate v. IRC [1921] 1 KB 64, 71, CIT v. A jax Products Ltd. [1965] 55 ITR 741 , 747 (SC), CIT v. A.N. Arunachalam[1994] 208 ITR 481 (Mad.), CIT v. Gujarat Oil & Allied Industries [1993] 201 ITR 325 (Guj.), CIT v. Jayant P atel [2001] 248 ITR 199 (Mad.), Addl. CIT v. Murlidhar Mathura Prasad [1979] 118 ITR 392 (All.), CIT v. Sitaram Bhagwandas [1976] 102 ITR 560 (Pat.) ,DIT (Investigation) v Poo ran Mall & Sons [1974] 96 ITR 390 (SC) and CIT v. Punjab Financial Corpn. [2002] 254 ITR 6 (Punj. & Har.) [FB], J. Naresh Kumar for the Appellant. JUDGMENT P.D. Dinakaran, J.- The above tax case appeal is directed…

Deprecated: trim(): Passing null to parameter #1 ($string) of type string is deprecated in /home/digixyei/sldsystempk.com/view/master-layout/view_case.php on line 492