M/s Pooja Cotspin Ltd., Solan V. DCIT, Parwanoo

ITA 134/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6930 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 11 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-08-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 16-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI B.R.R. KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.131 TO 134/CHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2009-10 TO 2012-13) M/S POOJA COTSPIN LTD., VS. THE D.C.I.T., VILLAGE SALLEWAL, CIRCLE-PARWANOO, TEHSIL NALAGARH, H.P. DISTT. SOLAN, H.P. PAN: AACCP5507G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR, CA RESPONDENT BY : SMT.CHANDER KANTA, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 23.08.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28.08.2017 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS BUNCH OF FOUR APPEALS HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY TH E SAME ASSESSEE AGAINST THE SEPARATE ORDERS OF LD. CI T (APPEALS), FARIDABAD DATED 2.11.2016, 13.11.2016, 14.11.2016 AND 13.11.2016 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YE ARS 2009-10, 2010-11, 2011-12 AND 2012-13 RESPECTIVELY. 2. SINCE THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN ALL THE APPEALS IS I DENTICAL, THEY WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OFF BY THIS COMMON ORDER. 3. FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE, WE WILL TAKE UP THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.132/CHD/2017 AND THE DECI SION GIVEN IN THIS APPEAL WILL APPLY TO OTHER APPEALS OF THE 2 ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.131/CHD/2017, 133/CHD/2017 AND I TA NO.134/CHD/2017 MUTATIS MUTANDIS. 4. COMING TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE, BOTH THE LD REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES HAVE FAIRLY AGREED T HAT THE ISSUE ADDRESSED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS IDENTICAL TO WHAT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO . 798/CHD/2012 IN THE CASE OF HYCRON ELECTRONICS VS I TO. 5. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS A FIRM ENGAGED IN MANUFACTURING OF TEXTILES, HANDLO OMS AND POWERLOOMS. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY CLAIMED DEDUC TION UNDER SECTION 80IC OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF 100% ELIGIBLE PROFIT FOR FIVE YEARS PERIOD FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 TO 2009-10. THE ASSESSEE HAD AGAIN CLAIMED 100% DEDUCTION AGAINST ELIGIBLE PROFITS IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11, WHICH WAS 6 TH YEAR OF PRODUCTION BY CLAIMING SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSION OF THE UNIT DURING ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2008-09. RELYING UPON THE AFORESAID DECISION OF TH E ITAT IN THE CASE OF HYCRON ELECTRONICS (SUPRA), THE CLAIM W AS REJECTED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IN THE AFOREMEN TIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, SINCE THE ISSUE O N FACTS AND LAW AS PER SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES IS IDENTI CAL AND WE FIND THE SUBMISSIONS TO BE CORRECT; ACCORDINGLY, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 6. IN THE RESULT, ALL THE APPEALS FILED BY THE ASSE SSEES ARE DISMISSED. 3 ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON . AUGUST, 2017. SD/- SD/- (B.R.R. KUMAR) (SANJAY GARG ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 28 TH AUGUST, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH