DCIT, Tiruppur V. Sueera Alloys Global Pvt Limited, Avanashi

ITA 1466/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8200 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 28-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2016
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SUPRIYO PAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M NARAYANAN
• Keywords: Business income; Reasonable cause
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , B B ENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , & BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ I.T.A.NO.1466/MDS/2016 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1, TIRUPUR. VS M/S.SUEERA ALLOYS GLOBAL PVT.LTD. 315/2, SEMBIYANALLUR VILLAGE KANDAMPALAYAM, AVINASHI-641 654. PAN: AAGCS6735B ( /APPELLANT) ( /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : MR.SUPRIYO PAL, JCIT /RESPONDENT BY : MR. M.NARAYANAN, A.R. /DATE OF HEARING : 9 TH AUGUST 2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 28 TH OCTOBER, 2016 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM:- THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE AGGRIEVED B Y THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APP EALS)- 3, COIMBATORE DATED 29.01.2016 IN ITA NO.561/2014- 15 PASSED UNDER SECTION 143(3) R.W.S. 250(6) OF THE AC T. 2. THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS BARRED BY LIM ITATION OF 18 DAYS. THE REVENUE FILED AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINI NG THE REASON FOR THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL STATING T HAT ON ACCOUNT OF MOVEMENT OF FILES BETWEEN THE OFFICE OF THE 2 ITA NO.1466/MDS/2016 ASSESSING OFFICER AT AVINASHI AND THE HEADQUARTER S AND ALSO THE POSTAL DELAY IN SENDING THE APPEAL PAPERS TO CHENNAI DUE TO WHICH THE DELAY OCCURRED WHICH IS UNINTENTIONAL AND THEREFORE PRAYED FOR CONDONATION OF DELAY. CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE REVENUE, WE ARE SATISFIED THAT THERE WAS REASONABLE CAUSE FOR THE D ELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL. HENCE IN THE INTEREST OF JUSTICE , WE HEREBY CONDONE THE DELAY IN FILING THE APPEAL AND ADMIT TH E SAME FOR ADJUDICATION. 3. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED SEVERAL GROUNDS IN ITS APPEAL, HOWEVER, THE CRUX OF THE ISSUE IS THAT THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION AMOUNTING TO RS.1,58,28,975 /- UNDER SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION O F THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SR I VELAYUTHASAMY SPINNING MILLS P.LTD. REPORTED IN 236 CTR 368 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT LOSSES ALREADY SET OFF AGAINST OTHER BUSINESS INCOME NEED NOT BE NOTIONALLY BROUGH T 3 ITA NO.1466/MDS/2016 FORWARD AND SET OFF FOR COMPUTING DEDUCTION UNDER S ECTION 80IA OF THE ACT. 4. BRIEF FACTS ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF STEEL, ALLOY STEEL CASTINGS, ALLIED PRODUCTS AND GENERATION OF P OWER BY WIND TURBINE GENERATOR FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME F OR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ON 29.09.2012 ADMITTING INC OME OF RS.1,09,35,830/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTIN Y AND NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) DATED 08.08.2013 WAS IS SUED TO THE ASSESSEE AND FINALLY ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED O N 13.11.2014. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEED INGS, IT WAS NOTICED BY THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICER THAT T HE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF RS.1,58,28,795/- UNDER SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT TOWARDS THE INCOME GENERATE D FROM WIND TURBINE GENERATOR WITHOUT SETTING OFF THE LOSS ES WHICH WAS ALREADY SET OFF AGAINST OTHER BUSINESS INCOME R ELYING IN THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COU RT IN THE CASE OF SRI VELAYUDHASAMY SPINNING MILLS PVT.LTD. R EPORTED 231 CTR 368. HOWEVER, THE LEARNED ASSESSING OFFICE R WAS OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE ISSUE HAS NOT BECOME FIN AL AS THE 4 ITA NO.1466/MDS/2016 DEPARTMENT HAS FILED SLP BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT WHICH IS PENDING FOR DECISION, DISALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT TO KEEP TH E MATTER ALIVE. 5. ON APPEAL, THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME T AX (APPEALS) ALLOWED THE DEDUCTION OF RS.1,58,28,975/- CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT IN V IEW OF THE BINDING DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF CIT VS.SRI VELAYUTHASAMY SPINNING MILLS LTD. CITED SUPRA. 6. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATI VE ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED ASSES SING OFFICER WHILE AS THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTAT IVE ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMI SSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)BY RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CAS E OF SRI VELAYUDHASAMY SPINNING MILLS LTD. CITED SUPRA. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND CAREFULL Y PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. FROM THE FACTS OF T HE CASE, 5 ITA NO.1466/MDS/2016 WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED VIEW THAT THE LEARNED COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY FOLLOWED THE DE CISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SRI VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS PVT.LTD. CITED SUPRA AND THEREBY ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION TO THE ASSES SEE UNDER SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT. FURTHER, IT IS NOT THE CA SE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIG H COURT IN THE CASE VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS P. LTD (S URPA) IS STAYED BY THE HONBLE APEX COURT. IT IS PERTINENT TO MENTION THAT IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY STAY GRANTED BY THE HON BLE APEX COURT AGAINST THE OPERATION OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT, ALL THE LOWER JUDICIARIES AS WEL L AS QUASI JUDICIAL AUTHORITIES ARE BOUND TO FOLLOW THE DECISI ON OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. SINCE THE LEARN ED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS RIGHTLY F OLLOWED THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL MADRAS H IGH COURT(SUPRA) AND HELD THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE AS SESSEE, WE DO NOT FIND IT NECESSARY TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORD ERS OF THE LEARNED COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). THER EFORE WE HEREBY CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED COMMISSI ONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). 6 ITA NO.1466/MDS/2016 8. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 28 TH OCTOBER, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( . ) (N.R.S.GANESAN) ( A.M OHAN ALANKAMONY ) # % / JUDICIAL MEMBER % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # /CHENNAI, ( /DATED 28 TH OCTOBER, 2016 SOMU *+ ,+ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. + 1 /DR 6. /GF