Johnson Pump (India) Limited, Ahmedabad V. The ACIT.,(OSD)Circle-8, Ahmedabad

ITA 1620/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0336 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 29-09-2016
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 26-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: N B SHAH
• Section: 80HHC

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI MANISH BORAD, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA.NO.1620/AHD/2012 / ASSTT. YEAR: 2004-2005 JOHNSON PUMP (INDIA) LTD. (NOW KNOWN AS SPX FLOW TECHNOLOGY (INDIA) PVT.LTD., SURVEY NO.275 OPP: MURLIDHAR SOCIETY ODHAV ROAD, ODHAV AHMEDABAD 382 415. PAN : AAACS 7234 B VS ACIT (OSD) CIR.8, AHMEDABAD. ! / (APPELLANT) '# ! / (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY : SHRI N.B. SHAH, AR REVENUE BY : SHRI JAMES KURIAN, SR.DR / DATE OF HEARING : 29/09/2016 / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 07/10/2016 $%/ O R D E R PER RAJPAL YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD.C IT(A)-4, MUMBAI DATED 18.5.2012 FOR THE ASTT.YEAR 2004-05. 2. GROUNDS OF APPEAL TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE ARE NOT IN CONSONANCE WITH THE RULE 8 OF THE INCOME TAX (APPELLATE TRIBUNAL) RULES , 1963 - THEY ARE DESCRIPTIVE AND ARGUMENTATIVE IN NATURE. IN BRIEF ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS WHETHER WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION ADMISSIBLE UND ER SECTION 80HHC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, SALES-TAX AND EXCISE DUTY ARE REQUI RED TO BE EXCLUDED FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER. ITA NO.1620/AHD/2012 2 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE HA S FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.10.2004 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.1,13,65, 560/-. THE ASSESSEE HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80HHC. WHILE COMPU TING SUCH DEDUCTION, IT HAS EXCLUDED EXCISE DUTY AND SALES TAX AGGREGATING TO RS.16,13,55,627/- FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER. THELD.AO DID NOT APPROVE THIS TYPE OF CALCULATION BY FOLLOWING JUDGMENT OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF M/S.CHOWRINGHEE SALES BUREAU PVT. LTD., 87 ITR 542. THE ASSESSEE CONTENDED BEFORE THE AO THAT THIS ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HONBLE BOMBAY HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. SU DARSHAN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD., 245 ITR 769 (BOM). THE LD.AO DID NOT ACCEPT THE CONTENTION OF THE ASSESSEE ON THE GROUND THAT THIS DECISION WA S NOT ACCEPTED BY THE REVENUE, AND IT WAS CHALLENGED BEFORE THE HONBLE S UPREME COURT. 4. IT IS BROUGHT TO OUR NOTICE THAT ISSUE IN DISPUT E IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HONB LE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. LAKSHMI MACHINE WORKS, 290 ITR 667. HONBLE SUPREME COURT HAS UPHELD VIEW TAKEN BY THE HONBLE BOMBAY H IGH COURT IN THE CASE OF SUDARSHAN CHEMICAL INDUSTRIES LTD. (SUPRA). IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT SALES-TAX AND EXCISE DUTY WOULD NOT FORM PART OF THE TOTAL TU RNOVER WHILE COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80HHC. THEREFORE, WE ALLOW THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE AND DIRECT THE AO TO COMPUTE THE DEDUCTION AFTER EXCLUDING THE SALES TAX AND EXCISE DUTY FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS ALLOWED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE COURT ON 7 TH OCTOBER, 2016 AT AHMEDABAD. SD/- SD/- (MANISH BORAD) ACCOUNTANTN MEMBER (RAJPAL YADAV) JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD; DATED 07/10/2016