DCIT, Parwanoo V. M/s Shree Dhanwantri Herbals, Solan

ITA 1024/CHANDI/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8908 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 19-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 28-09-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: MANJIT SINGHDR

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 1024/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 THE DCIT, VS M/S SHREE DHANWANTRI HAR BALS, CIRCLE, VILLAGE - KISHANPURA, PO-GURUMAJRA, PARWANOO (HP). TEHSIL NALAGARH, DISTT. SOLAN ( HP). PAN NO. : AAZFS3118E & ITA NO. 1025/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 THE DCIT, VS M/S UPS INVERTOR.COM, CIRCLE, VILLAGE - NARYAL, SECTOR 4, PARWANOO (HP). PARWANOO, DISTT. SOLAN (HP). PAN NO. : AABFU7064R & ITA NO. 1026/CHD/2016 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011-12 THE DCIT, VS M/S AEROWIN INTENATIO NAL, CIRCLE, VILLAGE KATHA, BADDI, PARWANOO (HP). INDUSTRIAL AREA, BADDI, DISTT. SOLAN (HP). PAN NO. : AAIFA8458N & ITA NOS. 1027 & 1028/CHD/2016 A.Y. : 2010-11 & 2011-1 2 THE DCIT, VS M/S STOVE KRAFT INDIA , CIRCLE, 307/2, VILLAGE - BURANWALA, PARWANOO (HP). BAROTIWALA, DISTT. SOLAN (HP). PAN NO. : AAZFS6497G 2 & ITA NOS. 1029 & 1030/CHD/2016 A.Y.: 2010-11 & 2011-12 THE DCIT, VS M/S USAKA ELECTRICALS , CIRCLE, PLOT NO. 30, SECTOR - 1, PARWANOO (HP). PARWANOO, DISTT. SOLAN (HP). PAN NO. : AABFU 7064R (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANJIT SINGH,DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR DATE OF HEARING : 19.12.2016 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 19.12.2016 O R D E R PER BENCH THIS ORDER SHALL DISPOSE OFF ALL THE ABOVE DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS FILED AGAINST DIFFERENT ORDERS OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) SHIMLA CANCELING THE PENALTY UNDER SEC TION 271(1)(C) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT ASSESSEES H AVE FILED RETURN OF INCOME CLAIMING DEDUCTION UNDER SEC TION 80IC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. THE ASSESSEES HAD ALRE ADY CLAIMED DEDUCTIONS UNDER SECTION 80IC OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF 100% DEDUCTION OF THE ELIGIBLE PROFIT FOR FIVE YEARS PRIOR TO THE PERIOD UNDER CONSIDERATION IN AP PEALS. THE ASSESSEES HAVE FURTHER CLAIMED 100% DEDUCTION U NDER SECTION 80IC OF THE ACT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER AP PEALS WHICH HAVE BEEN DENIED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICERS RESTRICTING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION TO THE EXTENT OF 25% AS 3 AGAINST CLAIM OF ASSESSEES MADE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC OF THE ACT AT 100%. THE APPEALS OF TH E ASSESSEES ON QUANTUM HAVE BEEN DISMISSED BY THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) AS WELL AS BY THE TRIBUNAL. ON THIS I SSUE, THE ASSESSING OFFICERS LEVIED THE PENALTY AGAINST T HE ASSESSEES UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT. 3. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) FOUND THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE HAVE BEEN DECIDED BY JURISDICTIONAL ITAT CHANDIGARH BENC H IN ITA NO. 326/2015 IN THE CASE OF M/S HYCRON ELECTRON ICS VS ITO FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 VIDE ORDER DATED 08.10.2015 AND PENALTY HAVE BEEN CANCELLED ON THE S AME MATTER IN ISSUE. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS REPR ODUCED IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS), THER EFORE, FOUND THAT THE ISSUE UNDER APPEAL IS SQUARELY COVER ED BY ORDER OF ITAT CHANDIGARH BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S H YCRON ELECTRONICS (SUPRA). THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE W ERE ALLOWED AND PENALTY WAS DELETED. 5. AFTER CONSIDERING RIVAL CONTENTIONS, WE ARE OF T HE VIEW NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLED FOR IN THE MATTER. THE COPY OF THE ORDER IN THE CASE OF M/S HYCRON ELECTRONICS (SUPRA) IS PLACED ON RECORD IN WHICH ON IDENTICAL ISSUE, PE NALTY UNDER SECTION 271(1)(C) OF THE ACT HAVE BEEN CANCEL LED. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) REPRODUCED THE ORDER OF THE TR IBUNAL IN THE IMPUGNED ORDERS. THE LD. DR DID NOT DISPUTE THAT ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT BY THIS ORD ER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S HYCRON ELECTRONICS (SUPRA). THEREFORE, NO INFIRMITY HAS BEEN POINTED OUT IN 4 THE IMPUGNED ORDERS OF LD. CIT(APPEALS) IN FOLLOWIN G THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M/S HYCRON ELECTRONICS (SUPRA), FOR THE PURPOSE OF CANC ELING THE PENALTY. THERE IS, THUS, NO MERIT IN ALL THE A PPEALS OF THE REVENUE. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS OF REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- SD/- ( ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (BHAVNES H SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEM BER DATED : 19 TH DECEMBER,2016. POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A) 4. THE CIT,DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT CHANDIGARH