ACIT, Uttrakhand V. M/s. Himalayan Autoera (India) Pvt. Ltd., Pantnagar

ITA 1736/DEL/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 106 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3087 (ITAT-DEHRADUN)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 year(s) 5 month(s) 4 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 25-08-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 21-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH ‘DB’, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. N. K. BILLAIYA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND MS. ASTHA CHANDRA, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA No.1736/Del/2017 Assessment Year: 2012 -13 ACIT C ircle-1, Haldwani Vs M/s. Himalayan Autoera (India) Pvt. Ltd. Plot No-61 & 68, Sector-IIDC, IIE, SIDCUL, Pantnagar PAN No.AACCH0708D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) Appellant Smt. Mayank Prabha Tomar, Sr. DR Respondent Sh. Pranav Yadav, Advocate Date of hearing: 26/08/2022 Date of Pronouncement: 26/08/2022 ORDER PER N.K. BILLAIYA, AM: This appeal by the revenue is preferred against the order of the CIT(A), Haldwani dated 19.12.2016 pertaining to A.Y.2012-13. 2. The solitary grievance of the revenue read as under :- 2 3. Briefly stated that the facts of the case are that the assessee company drives income from manufacturing motor vehicle parts. During the year under consideration the assessee declared total income of Rs.33555245/-and claimed deduction under section 80 IC of the Act amounting to Rs.31406421/-. 4. During the course of the scrutiny assessment proceedings the AO found that all the purchase of raw material and sale of final products are made to only one party namely M/s. Spicer India Ltd. The assessee was asked to justify its claim of deduction u/s. 80 IC of the Act. The assessee filed a detailed reply which did not find any favour with the AO who found that in the previous assessment years deduction claimed by the assessee was denied by the AO. The AO further found that in the previous assessment year the CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee but 3 since the revenue has preferred second appeal before the Tribunal the claim of deduction was denied. 5. We find that this Tribunal in ITA No.5787/Del/2012 for A.Y. 2009-10 and ITA No.4521/Del/2013 for A.Y. 2010-11 has considered the similar grievance and has decided the appeal in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. The relevant findings of the coordinate Bench read as under :- 4 5 6 7 6. Respectfully following the findings of the coordinate Bench (supra) we decline to interfere with the findings of the CIT(A). The appeal filed by the revenue is dismissed. 7. Decision announced in the open court on 26.08.2022. Sd/- Sd/- (ASTHA CHANDRA) (N. K. BILLAIYA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER *NEHA, Sr. Private Secretary* Date:- .08.2022 Copy forwarded to: 1. Appellant 2. Respondent 3. CIT 4. CIT(Appeals) 5. DR: ITAT ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT NEW DELHI