ITO, Baddi V. M/s Swastic Wire Products, Solan

ITA 1002/CHANDI/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 86177 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-02-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 03-02-2015
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 13-11-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES A CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI T.R. SOOD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1002/CHD/2014 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2008-09 THE ITO, VS. M/S. SWASTIK WIRE PRODUCTS BADDI DIST. BADDI SOLAN PAN NO.ABGFS3429J (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.K. MITTAL RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 03/02/2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 06/02/2015 ORDER PER T.R.SOOD, A.M. THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE O RDER DATED 14.08.2014 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) SHIMLA, H.P. 2. IN THIS APPEAL REVENUE HAS RAISED THE GROUND WHI CH IS GIVEN BELOW: 1. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IC OF INC OME TAX ACT, 1961 AMOUNTING TO RS. 30,85,410/- TO THE ASSES SEE, WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE A.O.. 3. IN THIS APPEAL DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDING WE FIND THAT NONE APPEARED DESPITE NOTICE BUT ON PERUSAL OF RECORD IT WAS NOTICED THAT MATTER IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREFORE WE PROCEED TO DECIDE THIS APPEAL ON EX-PARTE BASIS. 2 4. REVENUE WAS HEARD . 5. AFTER HEARING LD. DR WE FIND THAT ASSESSEE HAS C LAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC. ASSESSEE WAS MAINLY ENGAGED IN THE BU SINESS OF MANUFACTURING AND SELLING OF BARE/ANNEALED COPPER WIRE AND ENAMEL ED COPPER WIRE, IN OTHER WORDS ASSESSEE WAS OPERATING WIRE DRAWING UNIT WHIC H WAS HELD TO BE NON MANUFACTURING NATURE AND THEREFORE DEDUCTION WAS DE NIED. 6. ON APPEAL THE LD. CIT(A) ALLOWED THE APPEAL BY F OLLOWING THE ORDER OF TRIBUNAL THROUGH WHICH THE ASSESSEES BUSINESS WAS HELD TO BE OF MANUFACTURING IN A.Y. 2010-11 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO. 1 304/CHD/2012. 7. WE FIND THAT CHANDIGARH BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL HA VE BEEN CONSISTENTLY HOLDING IN NUMBER OF CASE THAT WIRE DRAWING PROCESS WOULD AMOUNT THE MANUFACTURING, THEREFORE, IN OUR OPINION THE LD. CI T(A) HAS CORRECTLY DECIDE THIS ISSUE AND WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A). 8. IN THE RESULT APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 06/02/2015 SD/- SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) (T.R. SOOD) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED : 06/02/2015 AG COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT, TH E CIT(A), THE DR