ACIT, CHENNAI V. Vimkar Contracts Works Pvt. Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 1329/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 95848 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 8 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2015
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Section: 80IB

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : CHENNAI . . . , ! , ' #$ % [ BEFORE SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ] ./ I.T.A.NO.1329/MDS/2015 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CORPORATE CIRCLE 3(2) CHENNAI VS. M/S VIMKAR CONTRACTS WORKS PVT. LTD. NO.45, CHAMIERS ROAD CHENNAI 600 028 [PAN AABCV 3911 H] ( &' / APPELLANT) ( ()&' /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.V. SREEKANTH, JCIT /RESPONDENT BY : NONE / DATE OF HEARING : 30-07-2015 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07-08-2015 / O R D E R PER N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS)-11, CHENN AI, DATED 12.3.2015 AND PERTAINS TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. 2. THE ONLY ISSUE ARISES FOR CONSIDERATION IS DEDUCTIO N CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE U/S 80IB OF THE ACT. ITA NO.1329/15 :- 2 -: 3. THE NOTICE OF HEARING WAS SERVED ON THE ASSESSEE B Y RPAD. THE REGISTRY HAS PLACED ON RECORD THE POSTAL ACKNOW LEDGEMENT AS A PROOF OF SERVICE OF NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE. EVEN T HOUGH THE ASSESSEE RECEIVED THE NOTICE OF HEARING, NO ONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSEE WHEN THE APPEAL WAS TAKEN UP FOR HEARING. THEREFOR E, WE HEARD THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE AND PROCEEDED TO DI SPOSE OF THE APPEAL ON MERIT. 4. SHRI A.V.SREEKANTH, LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE ACT ON THE WORK EXECUTED BY IT ON JOB WORK BASIS. IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06, THIS TRIBUNAL ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 80IB OF THE ACT. HOWEVER, TH E ASSESSING OFFICER FOUND THAT THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL HAS NOT ATTAI NED ITS FINALITY AND AN APPEAL HAS ALREADY BEEN FILED BEFORE THE MADRAS HIGH COURT. HOWEVER, THE CIT(A), BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 , ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. DR AN D PERUSED THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON RECORD. THE ASS ESSEE CLAIMED A SIMILAR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE ACT FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEARS 2005- 06 AND 2006-07. THIS TRIBUNAL BY AN ORDER IN I.T. A.NOS.1226/MDS/ ITA NO.1329/15 :- 3 -: 2008 AND 509/MDS/2014 FOUND THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE ACT IN RESPECT OF THE WO RK EXECUTED ON JOB WORK BASIS. THE CIT(A), BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL, ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 8 0IB OF THE ACT. THIS TRIBUNAL IS OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT WHEN A C O-ORDINATE BENCH ALLOWED THE SIMILAR CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE ON IDENT ICAL SET OF FACTS FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 AND 2006-07, WE DO NOT FIN D ANY REASON TO DIFFER WITH THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH O F THIS TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE, BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THIS TRIBUNAL FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 AND 2006-07 AND FOR THE REASONS STATED THER EIN, THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS CONFIRMED. 6. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE STANDS DI SMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07 TH OF AUGUST, 2015, AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( ! ) (CHANDRA POOJARI) ' / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . . . ! ) (N.R.S. GANESAN) / JUDICIAL MEMBER '# / CHENNAI $% / DATED: 07 TH AUGUST, 2015 RD %&'' ()'*) / COPY TO: ' 1 . / APPELLANT 3. ' +',! / CIT(A) 5. )-.' / / DR 2. / RESPONDENT 4. ' + / CIT 6. .0'1 / GF