SATISH CHANDRA, A. M. : - (1.) THE appeal by the assessee has been instituted against the order dt. 12th June, 1991, of the CIT(A), Bhopal, pertaining to asst. yr. 1988-89.
(2.) The assessee is a Government company. It claimed deduction of Rs. 10,72,812 under s. 32AB, which was negatived by the AO on the ground that neither accounts were audited by the auditors as required under s. 44AB nor reports of the auditors appointed by the C&AG were furnished. Moreover, statutory requirement, i.e., auditors report in Form No. 3AA under r. 5AB of the IT Rules was also not enclosed along with the return. On appeal, the CIT(A) upheld the AOs action. This has brought the assessee before us in appeal. The ground of appeal taken by the assessee reads thus : "That the learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed deduction under s. 32AB."
(3.) SUBSEQUENTLY, the assessee sought to raise the following additional ground, vide petition dt. 6th Jan., 1996 : "That on the facts and the circumstances of the case, the assessee ought to be allowed deduction under s. 32AB even though the prescribed reports have been furnished for the first time after the order of CIT(A) under appeal.";