Sai Bliss Drugs & Pharmaceuticals, Nahan V. DCIT, Shimla

ITA 200/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8225 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 23-03-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 31-01-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S K MITTAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL SMC BENCH,CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 200/CHD/2017 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 M/S SAI BLISS DRUGS & VS DCIT, CIRCLE, PHARMACEUTICALS,66-67, SHIMLA. INDUSTRIAL AREA, GONDPUR, POANTA SAHIB. PAN: ABCFS9508C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI S.K. MITTAL, DR DATE OF HEARING : 23.03.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 23.03.2017 O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI,JM THIS APPEAL BY ASSESSEE HAS BEEN DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(APPEALS), SHIMLA DATED 25.10.2016 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: I. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LAW , THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEAL) ERRED IN CONFIR MING THE ACTION OF ASSESSING OFFICER OF ALLOWING DEDUCTION U/S 80IC OF INCOME TAX ACT 1961 @ 25% INSTEAD OF 100% AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE FI RM. II. ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF CASE AND IN LA W, THE ASSESSEE FIRM WAS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80IC OF INCOME TA X ACT, 1961@ 100% OF PROFIT DERIVED FROM THE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING A ND THE CIT(A) AND THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAVE ERRED IN RESTRICTING THE DEDU CTION TO 25%. THE ALLEGED REASONS GIVING BY THE A.O AND CIT(A) FOR RESTRICTIN G THE DEDUCTION TO 25% ARE ERRONEOUS. III. THE APPELLANT CRAVES LEAVE TO ADD OR AMEND THE GR OUNDS OF APPEAL BEFORE THE APPEAL IS FINALLY HEARD AND DISPOSED O FF. 2. I HAVE HEARD LD. DR AND PERUSED THE ORDERS OF AU THORITIES BELOW. 3. THE ASSESSEE STARTED ITS MANUFACTURI NG ACTIVITY/OPERATION ON 23.06.2006 AND INITIAL ASS ESSMENT YEAR FOR CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IC OF THE ACT WAS A.Y. 2007-08. THE 2 ASSESSEE HAD ALREADY CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80IC TO THE EXTENT OF 100% OF THE ELIGIBLE PROFIT FOR FIVE YEARS PERIO D STARTING FROM A.Y. 2007-08 TO A.Y. 2011-12. IT WAS NOTICED THAT T HE ASSESSEE FIRM HAD AGAIN CLAIMED 100% DEDUCTION AGAINST ELIGI BLE PROFITS IN THE RELEVANT A.Y. 2012-13 WHICH IS 6 TH YEAR OF PRODUCTION FOR THE FIRM BY CLAIMING TO HAVE CARRIED OUT SUBSTANTIAL EX PANSION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER, FOR THE DETAILED REASONS MENTION ED IN THE ASSESSMENT ORDER HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IC ONLY @ 25% AS AGAINST THE CLAIM OF 100% MA DE BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. THE LD. CIT(A) NOTED IN THE ORDER THAT ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY ORDER OF ITAT, CHANDIGARH B ENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S HYCRON ELECTRONICS VS ITO (41 ITR 486). THE LD. CIT(A) REPRODUCED THIS ORDER IN HIS FINDINGS AND FO LLOWING THE SAME DISMISSED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE UPHOLDING THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC @ 25% ONLY. 6. LD. DR SUBMITTED THAT ISSUE IS COVERED AGAINST T HE ASSESSEE BY ORDER OF ITAT, CHANDIGARH BENCH IN THE CASE OF M/S HYCRON ELECTRONICS VS ITO (41 ITR 486). NO INFIRMIT Y HAVE BEEN POINTED OUT IN THE ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) IN FOLLOWING THE DECISION IN THE CASE OF M/S HYCRON ELECTRONICS VS ITO (41 ITR 4 86). THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE HAS NO MERIT. THE SAME IS DI SMISSED. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. SD/- (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 23 RD MARCH,2017. *SANJEEV* COPY TO: THE APPELLANT, THE RESPONDENT, THE CIT(A), THE CIT, DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT/CHD