The ITO.GNR Ward-I, Gandhinagar V. M/s. Accura Organics Foods, Gandhinagar

ITA 1473/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 94614 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-10-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 01-10-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 03-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: NARENDRA SINGH
• Section: 143(3); 10B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD B BENCH (BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) ITA NO: 1473/AHD/2012 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) INCOME-TAX OFFICER, GNR WARD-1, GANDHINAGAR V/S M/S. ACCURA ORGANICS FOODS, SURVEY NO. 122, KARAI, DIST: GANDHINAGAR (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) PAN: AASFS4779G APPELLANT BY : SHRI NARENDRA SINGH, SR. D .R RESPONDENT BY : SHRI TUSHAR. P. HEMANI, A.R ( )/ ORDER DATE OF HEARING : 01-10-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 16 -10-2015 PER ANIL CHATURVEDI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 1. THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS AGAINST THE ORD ER OF CIT(A), GANDHINAGAR, AHMEDABAD DATED 20.04.2012 FOR A.Y. 20 09-10. ITA NO. 1473 /AHD/2012 . A.Y. 2009-2 010 2 2. THE RELEVANT FACTS AS CULLED OUT FROM THE MATERIAL ON RECORD ARE AS UNDER. 3. ASSESSEE IS A PARTNERSHIP FIRM STATED TO BE ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF HULLED SESAME SEEDS & SESAME SEED OIL. ASSESSEE ELECTRONICALLY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR A.Y. 2009-10 ON 30.09.2008 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS. 4,20,735/-. THE CASE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY AND THEREAFTER THE ASSESSMENT WAS FRAMED UNDER SECT ION 143(3) VIDE ORDER DATED 30.11.2011 AND THE TOTAL INCOME WAS DETERMINE D AT RS. 2,25,75,100/- INTERALIA BY DENYING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION OF RS. 2,21,19,422/- U/S. 10B OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A.O., ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO VIDE ORDER DATED 20.04.2012 DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER OF L D. CIT(A), REVENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US AND HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWIN G GROUND:- 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN DEL ETING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O U/S. 10B OF THE ACT, AMOUNTING TO RS. 2,21,19,4 22. 4. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, A.O NO TICED THAT ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION OF RS. 2,21,19,422/- U/S. 10B OF THE ACT. A.O WAS OF THE VIEW THAT THE PRE-REQUISITE CONDITION FOR ELIGIBILI TY OF DEDUCTION U/S. 10B IS MANUFACTURING OF GOODS, ARTICLE OR THINGS. A.O WAS OF THE VIEW THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DEALS IN HULLED SESAME SEEDS & SESAME SEED OIL AND SUCH AGRO PRODUCTS CANNOT BE CONSIDERED TO BE MANUFACTURED AS PER THE DEFINITION OF MANUFACTURE STATED U/S. 2(29)BA OF THE ACT. HE ACCO RDINGLY DENIED THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION. AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF A.O., ASSES SEE CARRIED THE MATTER BEFORE LD. CIT(A) WHO DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR O F THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO. 1473 /AHD/2012 . A.Y. 2009-2 010 3 5. AGGRIEVED BY THE AFORESAID ORDER OF LD. CIT(A), REV ENUE IS NOW IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. BEFORE US, AT THE OUTSET, LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT T HE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS DIRECTLY COVERED IN ASSESSEES FAVOUR BY THE DEC ISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR A.Y. 2 008-09 IN ITA NO. 895/A/2012 ORDER DATED 28.08.2015. HE ALSO PLACED O N RECORD THE COPY OF THE AFORESAID ORDER. HE THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT SI NCE THE FACTS OF THE CASE, IN THE YEAR UNDER APPEAL ARE IDENTICAL TO THAT OF 08-0 9, NO INTERFERENCE TO THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IS CALLED FOR. LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF A.O. 7. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. IN THE PRESENT CASE, WE FIND THAT THE A.O HAD DENIED A SSESSEE THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S. 10B OF THE ACT MAINLY FOR THE REASON THAT ACCORDING TO HIM THE ASSESSEE WAS NOT UNDERTAKING MANUFACTURING PROCES S SO AS TO BE ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S. 10B OF THE ACT. WE FIND THA T ON IDENTICAL ISSUE, THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH OF TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CAS E FOR A.Y. 2008-09 IN ITA NO. 895/A/2012 ORDER DATED 28.08.2015 DECIDED T HE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY HOLDING AS UNDER:- 9. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. THE ISSUE IN THE PRESENT CASE IS WITH RESPECT TO AS TO WHETHER A SSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 10B OF THE ACT ON THE ACTIVITIES UNDERTAKEN BY IT. WE FIND THAT THE LD. CIT(A) WHILE DELETING THE ADDITION HAS GIVEN A FINDING THAT THE SESAME UNDERGO DIFFERENT PROCESS AT THE UNIT OF THE ASSESSEE AND THEREAFTER DISTINCT OBJECT COMES INTO BEING WHICH HAS A DIFFERENT NAME IN COMMERCIAL MARKET, DIFFERENT USAGE AND BEIN G DISTINCT AND DIFFERENT IN NUTRITIONAL PERCENTAGES PER UNIT WEIGHT AFTER HULLE D PORTION IS REMOVED. HE HAS ALSO HELD THAT THE PRODUCT MANUFACTURED HAS DIFFERENT MARKET AND COMMANDS HIGHER RATE THAN THE ITA NO. 1473 /AHD/2012 . A.Y. 2009-2 010 4 NATURAL SESAME SEEDS AND THUS THE SET OF PROCESS LE AD TO MANUFACTURE AS DEFINED IN SECTION 2(29BA) OF THE ACT. WE FURTHER FIND THAT HO N'BLE GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF STATE OF GUJARAT VS. SHYAM INDUSTRIES & OTHERS H AS ALSO HELD THE ACTIVITY OF CONVERTING NATURAL SESAME SEEDS TO HULD SESAME TO BE 'MANUFACT URING'. BEFORE US THE REVENUE HAS NOT PLACED ANY MATERIAL TO CONTROVERT THE FINDINGS OF LD. CIT (A) NOR HAS PLACED ANY BINDING DECISION IN ITS SUPPORT. IN VIEW OF THE AFO RESAID FACTS WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A). THUS THIS GR OUND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 8. BEFORE US, REVENUE HAS NOT POINTED OUT ANY DISTINGU ISHING FEATURE OF THE CASE AND THAT OF A.Y. 08-09 NOR HAS POINTED TO ANY CONTRARY BINDING DECISION IN ITS SUPPORT. IN VIEW OF THE AFORESAID FACTS, WE THEREFORE RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN A.Y. 08-09 AND FOR SIMILAR REASONS, FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH T HE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A). THUS THE GROUND OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 9. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 16 - 10 - 201 5. SD/- SD/- (RAJPAL YADAV) (ANIL CHATURVEDI) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AHMEDABAD: TRUE COPY RAJESH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: - 1. THE APPELLANT. 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. THE CIT (APPEALS) 4. THE CIT CONCERNED. 5. THE DR., ITAT, AHMEDABAD. 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY/ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT,AHM EDABAD