ACIT, Circle, Parwanoo V. M/s Aerowin International, Baddi

ITA 1286/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7203 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-04-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 10-10-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: ASHISH GUPTA

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, CHANDIGARH BENCH A CHANDIGARH !, ' # . %.. . & , '( # BEFORE: SMT. DIVA SINGH, JM & DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, AM ./ ITA NO. 1286/CHD/2018 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2013-14 THE ACIT, CIRCLE, PARWANOO. VS M/S AEROWIN INTERNATIONAL, VILLAGE- KATHA, BADDI, DISTT. SOLAN (HP). ./PAN NO: AAIFA8458N /APPELLANT /RESPONDENT / REVENUE BY : SHRI ASHISH GUPTA !' /ASSESSEE BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR, CA # $ '% /DATE OF HEARING : 19.03.2019 &'() '% /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16.04.2019 ')/ ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE REVENUE ASSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 25/07/2018 OF CIT-A SH IMLA PERTAINING TO 2013 14 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUND : 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES, THE LD. CIT( A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE PENALTY IMPOSED U/S 271(L)(C) IGNORING THE FACT THA T THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION (5)100% U/S 80-IC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. BUT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED THE SAME FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80-IC WHILE HE WAS WELL AWARE THAT HIS INCOME @75% IS TAXABLE UNDER THE LAW. 2. IT WAS A COMMON STAND OF THE PARTIES BEFORE THE BEN CH THAT CONSIDERING THE ALLOWABILITY OF ASSESSEE'S CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT IN THE 8 TH YEAR FOR THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY CARRIED OUT AT BADDI FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE IT AT IN HYCRON ELECTRONICS V ITO IN ITA 798/CHD/2012 DATED 27.05.2015 T HE CLAIM WAS RESTRICTED TO 25% OF ELIGIBLE PROFITS AS OPPOSED TO THE CLAIM OF 100% OF ELIGIBLE PROFITS. ON ACCOUNT OF THIS FACT, PENALTY IN SECTION 271 (1) (C) WAS LEVIED UPON THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. ITA 1286/CHD//2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 2 3. THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE ISSUE BEFORE THE CITA) FOLLO WING THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN M/S STOVE CRAFT INDIA VERSUS CIT-V AND OTHERS IN ITA 20 TO 24/2015 WHERE O N MERITS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE WAS HELD TO BE ALLOWABLE ON SIMILAR ISSU E THE PENALTY ORDER WAS QUASHED. THE POSITION OF LAW THEREAFTER, NO DOUBT UNDERWENT A CHANGE BY VIRTUE OF THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS CLASSIC BINDING INDUSTRIES (2018) 96 TAXMAN N.COM 405 (S.C) HOWEVER, THE ISSUE WAS AGAIN SUBSEQUENTLY REVIEWED BY THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS M/S AARHAM SOFTRONICS VIDE T HE DECISION DATED 20.02.2019. ACCORDINGLY, CONSIDERING THE POSITION OF LAW AND FACTS AS THEY STAND, WE FIND NO GOOD REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE CONCLUSION ARRIVED AT. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) QUASHING THE PENALTY IS UPHELD. THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. SAID ORDER WAS COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 16.04. 2019. SD/- SD/- ( . % . . . & ) ( ! ) (DR. B.R.R. KUMAR) (DIVA SINGH) '( # / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ' # / JUDICIAL MEMBER + , '* '+, -,' / COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. / THE APPELLANT - 2. / THE RESPONDENT - 3. # .' / CIT 4. # .' ( )/ THE CIT(A) 5. ,/0 ' 1 , % 1 , 23405 / DR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH 6. 04 6$ / GUARD FILE '* # / BY ORDER, 7 / ASSISTANT REGISTRAR