Asstt.CIT, Cir.1, Aurangabad, Aurangabad V. Endress+Hauser Flowtec (I) Pvt.Ltd., Aurangabad

ITA 1441/PUN/2007

• Counselvise Citation: 144124514 RSA 2007
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 9 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-09-2011
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 08-11-2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SANJAY SINGH
• Assessee Lawyers: C V CHITALE
• Section: 143(3); 10B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI I C SUDHIR, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI G.S. PANNU, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO 1441/PN/07 (ASSTT. YEAR 2004-05) ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF I.T .. APPELLANT CIR.1 AURANGABAD VS. ENDRESS + HAUSER FLOWTEC (I) P.LTD., .. RESPONDE NT M-174/175, MIDC, WALUJ, AURANGABAD PAN AAACE 4919M APPELLANT BY: SHRI SANJAY SI NGH RESPONDENT BY: SHRI C V CHITALE DATE OF HEARING : 26.08.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.09.2011 ORDER PER G.S. PANNU, AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS), AURANGABA D DATED 03.8.2007, WHICH IN TURN HAS ARISEN FROM AN ORDER P ASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOM E-TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT), PERTAINING TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. 2. THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THI S APPEAL READS AS FOLLOWS: WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE CIT (A) HAS ERRED BY ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND CONSIDERED EXCISE DU TY PAID/PAYABLE BY THE ASSESSEE AS NOT PART OF THE TOTAL TURNOVER WITHIN THE MEANING O F SECTION 10B FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT, BOMBAY IN THE CASE OF CIT V . SUDARSHAN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD. (245 ITR 769) IGNORING THE FACT THAT THE DECIS ION OF SUDARSHAN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES WAS GIVEN IN RELATION TO DEDUCTION U/S 80-HHC AND D OES NOT APPLY TO SEC. 10B AS IS CLEAR FROM THE DECISION F THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN TH E CASE OF CIT V LAXMI MACHINE WORKS 2 (290 ITR 667) WHERE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS C ATEGORICALLY CLARIFIED THAT THIS DECISION HAS BEEN GIVEN ONLY IN RESPECT OF DEDUCTI ON U/S 80-HHC. 3. BEFORE US, IT WAS A COMMON GROUND BETWEEN THE PARTI ES THAT SAME ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMEN T YEAR 2003-04 HAS BEEN DECIDED AGAINST THE REVENUE BY OUR CO-ORDINATE BENCH VIDE ITA NO 1597/PN/07 DATED 31.7.2009. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE A FORESAID ASPECT AND HAVE ALSO PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE A SSESSEES CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 (SUPRA) AND FIND THAT IDENTICAL ISSUE RAISED BY THE REVENUE STANDS DECIDED AGAINST THE REVENUE. FOLLOWING T HE PARITY OF REASONING, WE AFFIRM THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX (APPEALS) AND DISMISS THE GROUND OF APPEAL RAISED BY THE REVENUE. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSE D. DECISION PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 7 TH DAY OF SEPTEMBER, 2011. SD/- SD/- (I C SUDHIR) JUDICIAL MEMBER (G.S. PANNU) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER PUNE: DATED: 7 TH SEPTEMBER, 2011 B COPY OF THE ORDER IS FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT(A), AURANGABAD 4. THE CIT, AURANGABAD 5. THE D.R, A BENCH, PUNE 6. GUARD FILE TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT, PUNE BENCHES, PUNE 3