M/s Davi Sea Foods Ltd., Visakhapatnam V. THE JCIT, Visakhapatnam

ITA 16/VIZ/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 133 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2010 (ITAT-VISAKHAPATNAM)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 2 month(s) 14 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 24-03-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 23-11-2015
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 10-01-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: D KOMALI KRISHNA
• Keywords: Depreciation
• Section: 142(1); 11

Judgement Text

ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 1 , , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, VISAKHAPATNAM BENCH, VISAKHAPATNAM . , . , $ BEFORE SHRI V. DURGA RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER & SHRI G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./I.T.A.NO.16/VIZAG/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LTD. VISAKHAPATNAM VS. JCIT , RANGE - 3 , VISAKHAPATNAM [PAN: AABCD0248B ] ( / APPELLANT) ( / RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI G.V.N. HARI, AR / RESPONDENT BY : SMT. D. KOMALI KRISHNA, DR / DATE OF HEARING : 16.03.2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 24.03.2016 / O R D E R PER G. MANJUNATHA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER: THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAI NST THE ORDER OF CIT(A), VISAKHAPATNAM DATED 15.11.2013 AND IT PERTA INS TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 2 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSE E IS A COMPANY WHICH IS ENGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF AQUA CULTURE, E XPORT OF FROZEN SHRIMP AND ALSO ENGAGED IN THE ACTIVITY OF GENERATI ON OF WIND POWER. THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 ON 26.9.2009 DECLARING A TOTAL INCOME OF ` 12,73,89,990/-. THE CASE HAS BEEN SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY UNDER CASS. AC CORDINGLY, NOTICE U/S 143(2) & 142(1) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREIN AFTER CALLED AS 'THE ACT') WERE ISSUED. IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE, THE AUTH ORIZED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ASSESSEE APPEARED FROM TIME TO TIME AND FURN ISHED THE BOOKS OF ACCOUNTS AND OTHER RELEVANT INFORMATION CALLED FOR. DURING THE COURSE OF ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS, THE A.O. NOTICED THAT THE A SSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT, TOWARDS PROFITS FROM THE ACTIVITY OF GENERATION OF POWER. THE A.O. FURTHER NOTICED THAT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS COMMENCED THE GENERATION OF POWER FROM THE FINANCIA L YEAR 2004-05, BUT THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT HAS BEEN CLAI MED FIRST TIME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10. THEREFORE, ISSUED A SHOW C AUSE NOTICE AND ASKED TO EXPLAIN WHY THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED U/S 80IA OF THE ACT SHALL NOT BE DISALLOWED. IN RESPONSE TO SHOW CAUSE NOTICE, TH E ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED THAT IT HAS COMMENCED ITS ELIGIBLE BUSINE SS OF GENERATION OF POWER FROM THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2004-05. HOWEVER, IT HAS INCURRED LOSSES FOR THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR AND SUCH LOSS HAS B EEN SET OFF AGAINST ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 3 OTHER INCOME FOR THE RELEVANT FINANCIAL YEAR. THERE FORE, IT HAD AN OCCASION TO EARN PROFIT FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 09-10, WHICH WAS CLAIMED U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT AS PER SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, THE ASS ESSEE AT HIS OPTION CAN CLAIM DEDUCTIONS FOR 10 CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEAR S OUT OF 15 ASSESSMENT YEARS, BEGINNING FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEA R IN WHICH IT HAS COMMENCED ITS ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. SINCE, IT HAS INC URRED LOSSES FOR THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR, IT HAS CHOOSE TO CLAIM DED UCTIONS FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, WHICH IS IN ACCORDANCE WIT H THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80IA(2) OF THE ACT. 3. THE A.O. AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BY THE ASSESSEE, HELD THAT THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR REFERRED TO I N SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, WOULD MEAN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS COMMENCED ITS ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. THE A.O. FURTHER HELD THAT SUB S ECTION (5) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, CLEARLY PROVIDES FOR INITIAL ASSES SMENT YEAR AND SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. AS PER SUB SECTION (5) , THE ASSESSEE NEEDS TO DETERMINE THE PROFIT AVAILABLE FOR EXEMPTI ON BY TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THE FACT THAT THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS IS THE ONLY BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE AND ACCORDINGLY, THE NOTIONAL LOSSES BROUG HT FORWARD FROM EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS SHOULD BE SET OFF AGAINST THE PROFIT OF THE ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 4 CURRENT FINANCIAL YEAR TO DETERMINE THE INCOME AVAI LABLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. IN SUPPORT OF HIS ARGUMENTS, T HE A.O. HAS RELIED UPON THE SPECIAL BENCH DECISION OF ITAT, AHMEDABAD IN THE CASE OF ACIT VS. GOLD MINE SHARES & FINANCE PVT. LTD. (2008 ) 113 ITD 209 AND HELD THAT IN VIEW OF THE PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80IA (5) OF THE ACT, THE PROFIT FROM THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS FOR THE PURPOSE O F DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT, HAS TO BE COMPUTED AFTER DEDUCTION OF THE BROUGHT FORWARD NOTIONAL LOSSES AND DEPRECIATION OF ELIGIBLE BUSINE SS, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN ALLOWED SET OFF AGAINST OTHER INCOME IN E ARLIER YEARS. 4. AGGRIEVED BY THE ASSESSMENT ORDER, THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE THE CIT(A). BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE A SSESSEE REITERATED THE SUBMISSIONS MADE BEFORE THE A.O. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT MAK ES IT CLEAR THAT THE DEDUCTIONS SPECIFIED IN SUB SECTION (1) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, MAY AT THE OPTION OF THE ASSESSEE BE CLAIMED FOR ANY 10 CO NSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF 15 YEARS, BEGINNING FROM TH E YEAR IN WHICH THE UNDERTAKING OR THE ENTERPRISE COMMENCED ITS ELIGIBL E BUSINESS. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT IT IS THE OPTION OF THE ASSESSEE TO CLAIM FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE ASSESSMENT YEAR OR SUBSEQ UENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. HOWEVER, THE CLAIM SHOULD BE RESTRICTED TO 10 CONSECUTIVE ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 5 ASSESSMENT YEARS WITHIN THE BLOCK OF 15 YEARS ALLOW ED UNDER THE SUB SECTION (2) OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER SUBMI TTED THAT THE A.O. HAS INTERPRETED THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR REFERRED IN SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, BY HOLDING THAT THE INITIA L ASSESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WAS COMMENCED. THE ASSESSEE FURTHER STATED THAT THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT (2012) 340 ITR 477, HAS CLARIFIED THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR AND HELD THAT IF BEFORE CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT, THE LOSS AN D DEPRECIATION INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF ELIGIBLE BUS INESS HAS BEEN SET OFF AGAINST INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE FROM OTHER SOURCE, T HE SAID LOSS OR DEPRECIATION CANNOT AGAIN BE NOTIONALLY BROUGHT FOR WARD AND SET OFF AGAINST THE PROFITS AGAINST ELIGIBLE BUSINESS FOR C OMPUTING DEDUCTION. THEREFORE, THE A.O. WAS ERRED IN DENYING THE BENEFI T OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. 5. THE CIT(A) AFTER CONSIDERING THE EXPLANATIONS FU RNISHED BY THE ASSESSEE CONFIRMED THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A.O. THE CIT(A) FURTHER HELD THAT A COGENT READING OF SUB SECTION (2) AND S UB SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT WOULD SHOW THAT THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WOULD REFER TO THE INITIAL YEAR OF THE COMMENCEMENT OF THE ELIGIBLE ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 6 BUSINESS. IT IS THE LEGISLATURE HAD INTENDED THAT T HE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN, THE YEAR OTHER THAN THE INITIAL YE AR OF BUSINESS, IT WOULD HAVE SPECIFICALLY STATED SO. IN THE ABSENCE O F SUCH SPECIFIC DECISION, THE NORMAL MEANING HAS TO BE ATTRIBUTED T O THOSE WORDS. THE CIT(A) WHILE CONFIRMING THE ADDITIONS MADE BY THE A .O. DISTINGUISHED THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT JUDGEMENT, IN THE CAS E OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT (S UPRA) AND HELD THAT THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT HAS NOT SPECIFICALLY CONSIDERED THE SCOPE OF NON-OBSTANTE CLAUSE AND ALSO THE EXPLANATORY MEM ORANDUM PROVIDED IN THE FINANCE BILL, 1980. WITH THESE OBSERVATIONS, THE CIT(A) UPHELD THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND DENIED THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTIO N U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. AGGRIEVED BY THE CIT(A) ORDER, THE ASSESSEE I S IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 6. THE LD. A.R. SUBMITTED THAT THE CIT(A) WAS ERRED IN DENYING THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. THE LD. A.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT MAK ES IT CLEAR THAT THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION IS AT THE OPTION OF ASSESSEE. TH E ONLY REQUIREMENT OF THE LAW IS TO CLAIM THE DEDUCTION FOR 10 CONSECUTIV E ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF 15 ASSESSMENT YEARS, BEGINNING FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH SUCH ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WAS COMMENCED. THE ASSESSEE HAS C OMMENCED THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS FROM THE FINANCIAL YEAR 2004-05 A ND INCURRED LOSSES IN ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 7 THE INITIAL FINANCIAL YEARS. THEREFORE, IT DOES NOT HAVE AN OCCASION TO CLAIM THE DEDUCTION FROM THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEA R. THEREFORE, THE DEDUCTION CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE FROM THE ASSESSME NT YEAR 2009-10 IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW AND ALSO SUPPORTED BY THE JU DGEMENT OF HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPI NNING MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT (2012) 340 ITR 477. THE A.R. FURTHER SUBMITTED THAT THE CBDT HAS RECENTLY ISSUED A CIRCULAR, CLARIFYING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR PROVIDED IN SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT AND AS PER THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT VIDE CIRCULAR NO.1 OF 2016 DATED 15.2.2016, IN ITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE FIRST YEAR OPTED FOR BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. THE A.R. FURTHER SUB MITTED THAT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, IN THE CASE OF CIT VS . GRT JEWELLERS INDIA PVT. LTD., IN TCA NO.176 OF 2016 HAS CONSIDERED THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT AND AFTER CONSIDERING THE CIRCULAR, HELD T HAT THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE AS SESSEE HAS FIRST CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. THE LD. D.R. ON THE OTHER HAND, STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDER OF CIT(A). 7. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES, PERUSED THE MATER IALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD AND GONE THROUGH THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHOR ITIES BELOW. THE A.O. DENIED THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT, FOR THE REASON THAT THE ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 8 ASSESSEE OUGHT TO HAVE SET OFF THE NOTIONALLY BROUG HT FORWARD LOSSES OF EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS BEFORE CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER, THE INITIAL ASS ESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE HAS COMMENCED E LIGIBLE BUSINESS. THE A.O. FURTHER HELD THAT SUB SECTION (5) OF SECTI ON 80IA OF THE ACT, PROVIDES FOR DETERMINATION OF INCOME AVAILABLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. SUB SECTION (5) BEGINS WITH A NON-OBSTANTE CLAUSE NOT WITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ANY OTHER PROVIS IONS OF THIS ACT MAKES IT CLEAR THAT IT IS INDEPENDENT OF ANY OTHER PROVISIONS OF THE ACT. AS PER SUB SECTION (5), THE ASSESSEE HAS TO CONSIDE R THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS AS IF SUCH ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WERE THE ONLY SOURCE O F INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE A SSESSMENT YEAR TO OTHER SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINATION OF INCOME ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION. THEREFORE, THE ASSES SEE HAS TO BROUGHT FORWARD NOTIONAL LOSSES AND DEPRECIATION AND SET OF F AGAINST THE INCOME OF CURRENT YEAR, BEFORE CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. IT WAS THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE THAT SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT MAKES IT ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE DEDUCTIO N IS AT THE OPTION OF THE ASSESSEE FOR A PERIOD OF 10 CONSECUTIVE ASSESSM ENT YEARS OUT OF 15 ASSESSMENT YEARS, BEGINNING FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WAS COMMENCED. ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 9 8. THE ONLY DISPUTE ARISES FOR OUR CONSIDERATION IS , WHETHER INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR REFERRED TO IN SECTION 80IA(1) OF T HE ACT, WOULD MEAN THE YEAR OF COMMENCEMENT OF ELIGIBLE BUSINESS OR TH E YEAR IN WHICH THE DEDUCTION IS CLAIMED. SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 8 0IA OF THE ACT PROVIDES FOR DEDUCTION SPECIFIED IN SUB SECTION (1), MAY AT THE OPTION OF THE ASSESSEE, BE CLAIMED BY HIM FOR ANY 10 CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF 15 YEARS, BEGINNING FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH T HE UNDERTAKING BEGINS OR STARTS ITS ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. SUB SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, PROVIDES FOR DETERMINATION OF PROFITS AND GAINS OF AN ELIGIBLE BUSINESS TO WHICH THE PROVISIONS OF SUB SECTION (1) SHALL APPLY. BUT, AS PER SUB SECTION (5), FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINATI ON THE QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION AVAILABLE UNDER SUB SECTION (1), THE PROF ITS & GAINS SHALL BE COMPUTED AS IF SUCH ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WERE THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO T HE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE A.O. BY TAKING A CLUE FROM SUB SECTION (5 ) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, WAS OF THE OPINION THAT THE ASSESSMENT YEA R WOULD MEAN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE BEGINS ITS ELIGIBLE BUSI NESS. ADMITTEDLY, THE ACT DOES NOT DEFINE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR U/S 80I A OF THE ACT. THE A.O. REFERRED SUB SECTION (5) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT AND HELD THAT BECAUSE OF NON OBSTANTE CLAUSE USED IN SECTION 80IA(5) OF T HE ACT, STRICT INTERPRETATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE WORDS USED IN THE SECTION TO MEAN ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 10 AND UNDERSTOOD AS IF THE WORDS ARE INTENDED TO BE U SED. ACCORDINGLY, THE WORDS AS IF SUCH ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WERE THE ONL Y SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE COULD LEAD TO AN INTERPRETATION OF THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR TO MEANING THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ELIGIBLE BUSI NESS WAS COMMENCED, OTHERWISE, THE FICTION CREATED IN SUB SE CTION (5) SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT BECOME REDUNDANT. ACCORDINGLY, THE A.O. AFTER RELIED UPON THE SPECIAL BENCH DECISION OF ITAT AHMEDABAD, IN THE CASE OF GOLD MINE SHARES & FINANCE PVT. LTD. (2008) 113 ITD 209 (SUPRA) HELD THAT THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE YEAR OF COMMENCEMENT OF ELIGIBLE BUSINESS AND HENCE, THE NOTIONAL LOSSES IN CLUDING DEPRECIATION SHOULD BE SET OFF AGAINST ELIGIBLE PROFITS, EVEN TH OUGH THEY HAVE BEEN ALLOWED SET OFF AGAINST OTHER INCOME IN EARLIER YEA RS. 9. THE ASSESSEE CONTENTION IS THAT THE INITIAL ASSE SSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE INITIAL YEAR OF CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER S UB SECTION (1) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT. THEREFORE, THE A.O. WAS NO T CORRECT IN INTERPRETATION OF INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR MEANS THE YEAR OF COMMENCEMENT OF ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. BEFORE WE GO IN TO THE FACTS OF THE CASE, LET US UNDERSTAND THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT. ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 11 SECTION 80IA SUB SECTION (1) WHERE THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF AN ASSESSEE INCLUDES ANY PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED BY AN UNDERTAKING OR AN ENTERPRISE FROM ANY BUSINESS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (4) (SUCH BUSIN ESS BEING HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS), THERE SHALL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THIS SECTION, BE ALLOW ED, IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, A DEDUCTION OF AN AMOUNT EQ UAL TO HUNDRED PER CENT OF THE PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED FROM SUCH BUS INESS FOR TEN CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. SUB SECTION (2) THE DEDUCTION SPECIFIED IN SUB-SECT ION (1) MAY, AT THE OPTION OF THE ASSESSEE, BE CLAIMED BY HIM FOR ANY T EN CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF FIFTEEN YEARS, BEGINNING FR OM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE UNDERTAKING OR THE ENTERPRISE DEVELOPS AND BEGI NS TO OPERATE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY OR STARTS PROVIDING TELECOM MUNICATION SERVICE OR DEVELOPS AN INDUSTRIAL PARK [OR DEVELOPS A SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE REFERRED TO IN CLAUSE (III) OF SUB-SECTION (4)] OR GENERATES POWER OR COMMENCES TRANSMISSION OR DISTRIBUTION OF POWER [OR UNDERTAKE S SUBSTANTIAL RENOVATION AND MODERNIZATION OF THE EXISTING TRANSM ISSION OR DISTRIBUTION LINES. SUB SECTION (5) NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ANY OTHER PROVISION OF THIS ACT, THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF AN ELIGIBLE BUSINESS TO WHICH THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION(1) APPLY SHALL, FOR T HE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION UNDER THAT SUB -SECTION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY SUCCEEDING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR OR ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR, BE COMPUTED AS IF S UCH ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WERE THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DURI NG THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR AND TO EVER Y SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR UPTO AND INCLUDING THE ASSESSMENT Y EAR FOR WHICH THE DETERMINATION IS TO BE MADE. 10. SUB SECTION (1) OF SEC. 80IA, PROVIDES FOR DEDU CTION OF PROFITS & GAINS OF ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. SUB SECTION (2) PROVIDE S FOR PERIOD OF DEDUCTION. SIMILARLY, SUB SECTION (5) PROVIDES FOR METHOD OF COMPUTATION OF ELIGIBLE PROFITS FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE A CT. A PLAIN READING OF SUB SECTION (2) AND THE WORDS USED IN THE SECTION M AKES IT CLEAR, THAT THE DEDUCTION IS AVAILABLE AT THE OPTION OF THE ASS ESSEE FOR ANY 10 CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF 15 YEARS, BEGIN NING FROM THE YEAR ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 12 IN WHICH THE UNDERTAKING BEGINS ITS OPERATION. FROM THIS, IT IS ABUNDANTLY CLEAR THAT THE CLAIM IS AT THE OPTION OF THE ASSESS EE, BUT IT SHOULD BE WITHIN 15 YEARS FROM THE DATE OF COMMENCEMENT OF IT S ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. SUB SECTION (5) PROVIDES FOR DETERMINATION OF QUANT UM OF DEDUCTION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY SUCCEEDING THE INIT IAL ASSESSMENT YEAR OR IN SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. AS PER SUB SECTIO N (5), THE PROFITS OF ELIGIBLE BUSINESS SHALL BE COMPUTED AS IF SUCH ELIG IBLE BUSINESS WERE THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE RE LEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR AND TO EVERY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE P URPOSE AND OBJECT OF INSERTION OF SUB SECTION (5) IS THE MANNER OF DE TERMINATION OF QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION AVAILABLE FOR DEDUCTION FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY SUCCEEDING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR, BUT IT DOES NOT DEAL WITH INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE SUB SECTION (2) P ROVIDES A CLEAR MANDATE TO THE ASSESSEE, A CHOICE FOR DECIDING THE YEAR FROM WHICH IT DESIRES TO CLAIM DEDUCTION OUT OF THE ALLOWABLE 15 YEARS. FROM THE READING OF SUB SECTION (2) OF SECTION 80IA OF THE A CT, IT IS VERY CLEAR THAT THE DEDUCTION IS AT THE OPTION OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE ASSESSEE CAN CLAIM DEDUCTION, BEGINNING FROM ANY ASSESSMENT YEAR WITHIN THE BLOCK OF 15 ASSESSMENT YEARS. HOWEVER, THE DEDUCTION CAN BE CLAIMED FOR A PERIOD OF 10 CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS AND IT SH ALL NOT GO BEYOND 15 YEARS PROVIDED UNDER THE ACT. IN THE PRESENT CASE O N HAND, ON PERUSAL ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 13 OF THE FACTS AVAILABLE ON RECORD, WE FIND THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FIRST TIME CLAIMED ITS DEDUCTION FROM THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009 -10, BECAUSE IT HAS INCURRED LOSSES IN EARLIER YEARS AND WHICH WAS SET OFF AGAINST OTHER SOURCE OF INCOME IN THE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR. THERE FORE, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE CLAIM MADE BY THE ASSESSEE FOR THE A.Y. 2009-10, U/S 80IA OF THE ACT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH LAW. 11. DURING THE COURSE OF HEARING, THE A.R. OF THE A SSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL, IS COVERED BY THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT, IN THE CASE OF VELAYUDHA SWAMY SPINNING MILLS PVT. LTD. VS. ACIT (2012) 340 ITR. THE A.R. S UBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF MADRAS HAD AN OCCASION TO DEA L WITH INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR AND SET OFF BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES U/S 80IA(5) OF THE ACT. AFTER CONSIDERING THE RELEVANT PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT, THE COURT HELD THAT THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WOU LD MEAN THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE MADE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION AND NOT YEAR OF COMMENCEMENT OF ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. THE COURT FURTHE R HELD THAT THE LOSSES AND DEPRECIATION OF THE EARLIER YEARS, WHICH HAVE ALREADY BEEN ABSORBED AGAINST THE PROFITS OF OTHER BUSINESS, CAN NOT BE NOTIONALLY BROUGHT FORWARD AND SET OFF AGAINST THE PROFITS OF THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 14 FOR COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION AVAILABLE U/S 80IA OF T HE ACT. THE RELEVANT PORTION IS REPRODUCED BELOW: FROM READING OF SUB-S.(1) OF S. 80-IA, IT IS CLEAR THAT IT PROVIDES THAT WHERE THE GROSS TOTAL INCOME OF AN ASSESSEE INCLUDES ANY PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED BY AN UNDERTAKING OR AN ENTERPRISE FROM ANY BUSINES S REFERRED TO IN SUB-S (4) I.E. REFERRED TO AS THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS, THERE SH ALL, IN ACCORDANCE WITH AND SUBJECT TO THE PROVISIONS OF THE SECTION, BE ALLOWE D, IN COMPUTING THE TOTAL INCOME OF THE ASSESSES, A DEDUCTION OF AN AMOUNT EQ UAL TO 100 PER CENT OF THE PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED FROM SUCH BUSINESS FO R TEN CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS. DEDUCTION IS GIVEN TO ELIGIBLE BU SINESS AND THE SAME IS DEFINED IN SUB-S. (4). SUB-S. (2) PROVIDES OPTIO N TO THE ASSESSEE TO CHOOSE 10 CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF 15 YE ARS. OPTION HAS TO BE EXERCISED. IF IT IS NOT EXERCISED, ASSESSEE WILL NOT BE GETTING THE BENEFIT. FIFTEEN YEARS IS OUTER LIMIT AND THE SAME IS BEGINNING FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE UNDERTAKING OR THE ENTER PRISE DEVELOPS AND BEGINS TO OPERATE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE ACTIVITY ETC. SUB-S. (5) DEALS WITH QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION FOR AN ELIGIBLE BUSINESS. THE WORDS 'INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR ARE USED IN SUB-S. (5) AND THE SAM E IS NOT DEFINED UNDER THE PROVISIONS. IT IS TO BE NOTED THAT INITIAL ASSES SMENT YEAR EMPLOYED IN SUB-S. (5) IS DIFFERENT FROM THE WORDS BEGINNING F ROM THE YEAR REFERRED TO IN SUB-S. (2). IMPORTANT FACTORS ARE TO BE NOTED I N SUB-S. (5) AND THEY ARE AS UNDER: IT STARTS WITH NON OBSTANTE CLAUSE WHICH MEANS IT O VERRIDES ALL THE PROVISIONS OF THE ACT AND OTHER PROVISIONS ARE TO B E IGNORED; (2) IT IS FOR THE PURPOSE OF DETERMINING THE QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION ; (3) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY SUCCEEDING THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR; (4) IT IS A DEEMING PROVISION; (5) FICTION CREATED THAT THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS IS THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME; AND (6) DURING THE PREVI OUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR AND EVERY SUBSEQUENT AS SESSMENT YEAR. . FROM READING OF THE ABOVE, IT IS CLEAR THAT THE ELI GIBLE BUSINESS WERE THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME, DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR REL EVANT TO INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR AND EVERY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEA RS. WHEN THE ASSESSEE EXERCISES THE OPTION, THE ONLY LOSSES OF T HE YEARS BEGINNING FROM INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR ALONE ARE TO BE BROUGH T FORWARD AND NOT LOSSES OF EARLIER YEARS WHICH WERE ALREADY SET OFF AGAINST THE INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE. LOOKING FORWARD TO A PERIOD OF TEN Y EARS FROM THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT IS CONTEMPLATED IT DOES NOT ALLOW THE RE VENUE TO LOOK BACKWARD AND FIND OUT IF THERE IS ANY LOSS OF EARLI ER YEARS AND BRING FORWARD NOTIONALLY EVEN THOUGH THE SAME WERE SET OF F AGAINST OTHER INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE AND THE SET OFF AGAINST THE CURRENT INCOME OF THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS ONCE THE SET OFF IS TAKEN PLACE I N EARLIER YEAR AGAINST THE OTHER INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE, THE REVENUE CANNO T REWORK THE SET OFF AMOUNT AND BRING IT NOTIONALLY. FICTION CREATED IN SUB-S. (5) DOES NOT CONTEMPLATES TO BRING SET OFF AMOUNT NOTIONALLY FIC TION S CREATED ONLY FOR ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 15 THE LIMITED PURPOSE AND THE SAME CANNOT BE EXTENDED BEYOND THE PURPOSE FOR WHICH IT IS CREATED THERE IS NO DISPUTE THAT LOSSES INCURRED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE ALREADY SET OFF AND ADJUSTED A GAINST THE PROFITS OF THE EARLIER YEARS DURING THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YE AR, THE ASSESSEE EXERCISED THE OPTION UNDER S 80-IA(2) IN TAX CASE N OS 909 OF 2009 AS WELL AS 940 OF 2009, THE ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS 2005-0 6 AND IN THE TAX CASE NO 918 OF 2008 THE ASSESSMENT YEAR WAS 2004-05 DURING THE RELEVANT PERIOD, THERE WERE NO UNABSORBED DEPRECIAT ION OR LOSS OF THE ELIGIBLE UNDERTAKINGS AND THE SAME WERE 1RADY ABSO RBED IN THE EARLIER YEARS THERE IS A POSITIVE PROFIT DURING THE RELEVAN T YEAR. THEREFORE, LOSS IN THE YEAR EARLIER TO INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR ALRE ADY ABSORBED AGAINST THE PROFIT OF OTHER BUSINESS CANNOT BE NOTIONALLY BROUG HT FORWARD AND SET OFF AGAINST THE PROFITS OF THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS AS NO SUCH MANDATE IS PROVIDED IN S 80-IA(5) CIT VS TTK PHARMA LTD [TAX CASE (APPEAL) NO.298 OF 2004, DT 23RD DEC., 2009] FOLLOWED; CIT VS MEWAR OIL & GENERAL MILLS LTD (2004) 186 CTR (RAJ) 141 (2004) 2 71 ITR 311 (RAJ) CONCURRED WITH , MOHAN BREWERIES & DISTILLERIES LTD VS ASSTT CIT ( 2008) 114 TTJ (CHENNAI) 532 (2008) 3 DTR (CHENNAI)(TRIB) 477 AFFIRMED ALL THE AUTHORITIES BELOW HAD GIVEN A CATEGORICAL F INDING THAT THE FIRST YEAR IS 2004-05. THE ISSUE ALSO REACHED FINALITY. THE REV ENUE HAS ACCEPTED THE FINDING GIVEN BY THE CIT(A) AND THEREFORE, THE SAME CANNOT BE RAISED IN THE ASSESSEES APPEAL BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. IT IS A QUES TION OF FACT. IT IS NOT A PERVERSE ORDER. THERE IS NO ERROR OR ILLEGALITY IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WARRANTING INTERFERENCE. THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS IN CONFORMITY WITH LAW. 12. THE A.R. RELIED UPON HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT DECISION, IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. GRT JEWELLERS INDIA PVT. LTD. IN TC A NO.176 OF 2016 AND SUBMITTED THAT THE HONBLE MADRAS HIGH COURT, AFTER TAKING NOTE OF CIRCULAR ISSUED BY CBDT, CIRCULAR NO.1 OF 16 DATED 15.2.2016 HELD THAT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 80IA(5) OF THE ACT, THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE FIRST YEAR OPTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CLAIMING DEDUCTION U/S 80IA(5) OF THE ACT. THE RELEVANT PORTION IS EX TRACTED BELOW: ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 16 'CIRCULAR NO. 112016 GOVERNMENT OF INDIA MINISTRY OF FINANCE DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE CENTRAL BOARD OF DIRECT TAXES NORTH BLOCK, NEW DELHI, THE 15TH FEBRUARY, 2016 SUB JECT: CLARIFICATION 1 OF THE TERM 'INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR' IN SECTION 8 01A(5) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 SECTION 801A OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961 ('ACT'), A S SUBSTITUTED BY FINANCE ACT, 1999 WITH EFFECT FROM 1.4.2000, PRO VIDES FOR DEDUCTION OF AN AMOUNT EQUAL TO 100% OF THE PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED BY AN UNDERTAKING OR ENTERPRISE FROM AN ELIGIBLE BUSINESS (AS REFERRED TO IN SUB-SECTION (4) OF THAT SECTION) IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PRESCRIBED PROVISIONS. SUB-SECTION (2) OF SECTION SO1A FURTHER PROVIDES THAT THE AFORESAID DEDUCTION CAN BE CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE, AT HIS OPTION, FOR ANY TEN CONSECUTIVE ASSESSMENT YEARS OUT OF FIFTEEN YEARS. (TWENTY YEARS IN CERTAIN CASES) BEGINNING FROM THE YEAR IN WHICH THE UNDERTAKING COMMENCES OPERATION, BEGINS DEVELOPMENT OR STARTS PROVIDING SERVICES ETC. AS STIPULATED THEREIN. SUB- SECTION (5) OF SECTION 801A FURTHER PROVIDES AS UNDER: 'NOTWITHSTANDING ANYTHING CONTAINED IN ANY OTHER PR OVISION OF THIS ACT, THE PROFITS AND GAINS OF AN ELIGIBLE BUSI NESS TO WHICH THE PROVISIONS OF SUB-SECTION (1) APPLY SHALL, FOR THE PURPOSES OF DETERMINING THE QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION UNDER THAT SUB -SECTION FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IMMEDIATELY SUCCEEDING THE INIT IAL ASSESSMENT YEAR OR ANY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR, BE COMPUTED AS IF SUCH ELIGIBLE BUSINESS WERE THE ONLY SOURCE OF INCOME OF THE ASSESSEE DURING THE PREVIOUS YEAR RELEVANT TO THE INITIAL AS SESSMENT YEAR AND TO EVERY SUBSEQUENT ASSESSMENT YEAR UP TO AND INCLU DING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR WHICH THE DETERMINATION IS TO B E MADE'. IN THE ABOVE SUB-SECTION, WHICH PRESCRIBES THE MANNE R OF DETERMINING THE QUANTUM OF DEDUCTION, A REFERENCE H AS BEEN MADE TO THE TERM 'INITIAL ASSESSMENT YCAR IT HAS BEEN RE PRESENTED THAT SOME ASSESSING OFFICERS ARE INTERPRETING THE TERM ' INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR' AS THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS/MA NUFACTURING ACTIVITY HAD COMMENCED AND ARE CONSIDERING SUCH FIR ST YEAR OF COMMENCEMENT/OPERATION ETC. ITSELF AS THE FIRST YEA R FOR GRANTING DEDUCTION, IGNORING THE CLEAR MANDATE PROVIDED UNDE R SUB-SECTION (2) WHICH ALLOWS A CHOICE TO THE ASSESSEE FOR DECID ING THE YEAR FROM WHICH IT DESIRES TO CLAIM DEDUCTION OUT OF THE APPL ICABLE SLAB OF FIFTEEN (OR TWENTY) YEARS. THE MATTER HAS BEEN EXAMINED BY THE BOARD. IT IS ABU NDANTLY CLEAR FROM SUB-SECTION (2) THAT AN ASSESSEE WHO IS ELIGIBLE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S 80IA HAS THE OPTION TO CHOOSE THE INI TIAL/FIRST YEAR FROM WHICH IT MAY DESIRE THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION THE TEN CONSECUTIVE YEARS, OUT OF A SLAB OF FIFTEEN (OR TWENTY) YEARS, AS PRESCRIBED UNDER THAT SUB-SECTION. IT IS HEREBY CLARIFIED THAT ONCE SUCH INITIAL ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 17 ASSESSMENT YEAR HAS BEEN OPTED FOR BY THE ASSESSEE, HE SHALL BE ENTITLED TO CLAIM DEDUCTION U/S 801A FOR TEN CONSEC UTIVE YEARS BEGINNING FROM THE YEAR IN RESPECT OF WHICH HE HAS EXERCISED SUCH OPTION SUBJECT TO THE FULFILLMENT OF CONDITIONS PRE SCRIBED IN THE SECTION. HENCE, THE TERM 'INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR' WOULD MEAN THE FIRST YEAR OPTED FOR BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CLAIMING D EDUCTION U/S 801A. HOWEVER, THE TOTAL NUMBER OF YEARS FOR CLAIMING DED UCTION SHOULD NOT TRANSGRESS THE PRESCRIBED SLAB OF FIFTEEN OR TW ENTY YEARS, AS THE CASE MAY BE AND THE PERIOD OF CLAIM SHOULD BE AVAIL ED IN CONTINUITY. THE ASSESSING OFFICERS ARE, THEREFORE, DIRECTED TO ALLOW DEDUCTION U/S SUIA IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS CLARIFIC ATION AND AFTER BEING SATISFIED THAT ALL THE PRESCRIBED CONDITIONS APPLICABLE IN A PARTICULAR CASE ARE DULY SATISFIED. PENDING LITIGAT ION ON ALLOWABILITY OF DEDUCTION U/S 80 IA SHALL ALSO NOT BE PURSUED TO TH E EXTENT IT RELATES TO INTERPRETING INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR' AS MENTION ED IN SUB-SECTION (5) OF THAT SECTION FOR WHICH THE STANDING COUNSEL/ DRS BE SUITABLY INSTRUCTED. THE ABOVE BE BROUGHT TO THE NOTICE OF ALL ASSESSING OFFICERS CONCERNED. 5. THEREFORE, ADMITTEDLY, QUESTIONS OF LAW 2 AND 3 ARE ALSO COVERED BY THE ABOVE CIRCULAR. HENCE, THE APPEAL D ESERVES TO BE DISMISSED. 12. CONSIDERING THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND ALSO RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE JUDGEMENT OF HIGH COURT OF MADRAS, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THE CIRCULAR ISSUED BY THE CBDT VI DE CIRCULAR NO.1 OF 2016, HAS SETTLED THE CONTROVERSIES OF INITIAL ASSE SSMENT YEAR FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT. THE INITIAL ASS ESSMENT YEAR WOULD MEAN THE FIRST YEAR OPTED BY THE ASSESSEE FOR CLAIM ING DEDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT AND NOT THE YEAR IN WHICH THE ELIGI BLE BUSINESS WAS COMMENCED. THEREFORE, WE DIRECT THE A.O. TO ALLOW D EDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE. HENCE, WE SE T ASIDE THE ORDER ITA NO.16/VIZAG/2014 M/S. DEVI SEAFOODS LIMITED,VISAKHAPATNAM 18 PASSED BY THE CIT(A) AND DIRECT THE A.O. TO ALLOW D EDUCTION U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. 11. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED. THE ABOVE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 24 TH MAR16. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( . ) (V. DURGA RAO) (G. MANJUNATHA) /JUDICIAL MEMBER /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # /VISAKHAPATNAM: ' /DATED : 24.03.2016 VG/SPS )# *# /COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO:- 1. / THE APPELLANT M/S. DEVI SEA FOODS LTD., D.NO.9 -14-8/1, CBM COMPOUND, VISAKHAPATNAM 2. / THE RESPONDENT JCIT, RANGE-3, VISAKHAPATNAM 3. + / THE CIT-1, VISAKHAPATNAM 4. + ( ) / THE CIT (A), VISAKHAPATNAM 5. # . , . , # / DR, ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM 6 . / GUARD FILE / BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // 12 . (SR.PRIVATE SECRETARY) . , # / ITAT, VISAKHAPATNAM