DCIT, Coimbatore V. M/s. Chettinad Lignite Transport Services Pvt. Ltd., Coimbatore

ITA 2446/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 7824 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 30-12-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 23-11-2016
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 23-08-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: M M BHUSARI
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME - TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU R L REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I T.A. NO. 2 446 /MDS/201 6 / ASSESSMENT YEAR :20 1 2 - 1 3 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE I, 63 - A, RACE COURSE ROAD, COIMBATORE. VS. M/S. CHETTINAD LIGNITE TRANSPORT SERVICES PVT. LTD., 43, RACE COURSE ROAD, COIMBATORE 641 018. [PAN:AABCC7357G] ( / APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.M. BHUSARI, CIT / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI S AROJ KUMAR PARIDA, ADVOCATE / DATE OF HEARING : 2 3 . 11 .201 6 / DATE OF P RONOUNCEMENT : 30 . 1 2 .201 6 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY , JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONE R OF INCOME TAX ( APPEALS ) I , C OIMBATORE , DATED 2 7 . 0 5 .20 1 6 RELE VANT TO THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 20 1 2 - 1 3 . THE ONLY EFFECTIVE GROUND RAISED IN THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS THAT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DIRECTING TO DELETE THE DISALLOWANCE OF . 17,81,08,315/ - AS CLAIMED BY THE ASSESSEE AS DEDUCTION IN TERMS OF EXPLANATION (13) TO SECTION 80IA OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ ACT IN SHORT]. I.T.A. NO . 2446 /M/ 16 2 2. THE BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS R ETURN OF INCOME ON 29.09.2012 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF .18,62,51,760/ - UNDER NORMAL PROVISIONS AND NET AGRICULTURAL INCOME OF .27,875/ - . THE ASSESSEE S TOTAL INCOME UNDER MAT PROVISION WAS .36,43,84,346/ - . SINCE THE ASSESSEE S TAX LIABILITY AS PER MAT PROVISIONS EXCEED TAX PAY A BLE UNDER NORMAL PROVISION, TH E ASSESSEE PAID TAXES AS PER MAT. THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE WAS SELECTED FOR SCRUTINY BY ISSUING NOTICE UNDER SECTION 143(2) OF THE ACT. IN RESPONSE THERETO, THE ASSESSEE FILED ALL DETAILS AS CALLED FOR AND THE SUBMISSIONS WERE EXAMINED WITH THE ACCOUNTS OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER AND COMPLETED THE ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE ACT ON 20.03.2015 BY MAKING VARIOUS ADDITIONS/DISALLOWANCE. 2.1 WITH REGARD TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION, THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICE R THAT M/S. ST - CMS ELECTRIC COMPANY PVT. LTD., WHICH IS INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT HAD AGREED TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT A 250 MW ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING FACILITY AT NEYVELI AND OPERATE THE PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF GENERATING AND SELLING ELECTRI CITY TO THE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD UNDER A POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT DATED 20.11.1996. PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE AGREEMENT, THE SAID COMPANY HAD ENTERED INTO A FUEL SUPPLY AGREEMENT ON 29.4.1998 WITH NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION WHEREBY NLC AGREED TO SUPPL Y LIGNITE TO THE SAID COMPANY. IT I.T.A. NO . 2446 /M/ 16 3 CALLED FOR BIDS FROM CONTRACTORS TO CONSTRUCT, OWN, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A LIGNITE TRANSPORT SYSTEM. SINCE, M/S. ST - CMS WAS ENTITLED TO APPOINT A CONTRACTOR FOR THE AFORESAID PURPOSE IN TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT, THE ASSESSEE WAS DESIGNATED AS THE CONTRACTOR FOR DOING THE AFORESAID INFRASTRUCTURE WORK. PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE CONTRACT THE ASSESSEE LAID ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURAL FACILITIES, DEVELOPED AND WAS OPERATING THE RAILWAY SIDINGS AT VADALUR AND UTHANGALMANGALAM RAILWAY ST ATIONS. THE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD VIDE ITS LETTER DATED 17.10.2001 HAD ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEE AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDER AND REITERATED THE SAME VIDE THEIR LETTER DATED 25.9.2006. PURSUANT TO THE ABOVE CONTRACTS, THE ASSESSEE HAD SET UP INFRASTRU CTURAL FACILITIES AS REQUIRED BY SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT AND CLAIMED RELIEF UNDER SEC TION 80IA FOR ITS 10 TH YEAR OF ITS OPERATION. THE ASSESSING OFFICER REJECTED THE CLAIM FOR RELIEF UNDER S ECTION 80IA ON THE GROUND THAT ASSESSEE DID NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUB - SEC.(4) AND THAT EXPLANATION (13) TO SEC.80IA OF THE ACT, WHICH IS APPLICABLE TO THE ASSESSEE. 3 . AGGRIEVED, THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE LD. CI T (A). ON APPEAL, THE LD. CI T (A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR . AGAINST THIS, THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US. 4 . AFTER HEARING BOTH THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT SAME ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THIS TRIBUNAL FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 201 1 - 1 2 AND I.T.A. NO . 2446 /M/ 16 4 DECIDED THE ISSUE AGAINST THE DEPARTMENT VIDE ITA NO. 313 /MDS/201 5 DATED 13.8.2014. FURTHER, THE LD. AR HAS ALSO PLACED RELIANCE ON THE ORDERS OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003 - 04 TO 20 11 - 1 2 , WHEREIN IT WAS OBSERVED THAT EVEN AFTER EXPLANATION TO SUB - SECTION (13) TO SEC TION 80IA OF THE ACT WAS INSERTED, THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION U NDER SECTION 80IA OF THE ACT. THE ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN DEVELOPMENT OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND IT IS NOT A PAID CONTRACTOR. IN VIEW OF THE ORDERS OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEE S OWN CASE FOR THE ABOVE ASSESSMENT YEARS, THE ASSESSMENT YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION BEING 10 TH YEAR, WE ARE INCLINED TO DISMISS THE GROUND TAKEN BY THE REVENUE. 5 . IN THE RESULT, THE APPE AL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED . ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THE 30 TH DECEMBER , 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/ - SD/ - (A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( DUVVURU RL REDDY ) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 30 . 1 2 .201 6 VM/ - / COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT , 2. / RESPONDENT , 3. ( ) / CIT(A) , 4. / CIT , 5. / DR & 6. / GF.