The ACIT, Circle-4, Surat V. M/s. Sahajanand Technology Pvt.Ltd., Surat

ITA 3189/AHD/2007

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6622 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 8 month(s) 13 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-04-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 31-03-2010
• Assessment Year: 2004-2005
• Appeal Filed On: 27-07-2007
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: KUMAR HRISHIKESH
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND N. S. SAINI, AM) ITA NO.3189/AHD/2007 A. Y.: 2004-05 THE A. C. I. T., CIRCLE-4, ROOM NO.223, AAYAKAR BHAVAN, MAJURA GATE, SURAT VS M/S. SAHAJANAND TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD., SAHAJANAND HOUSE, PARSI STREET, SIYEDPURA, SURAT, PA NO. AADCS 4343N (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ASSESSEE BY (WRITTEN SUBMISSION) REVENUE BY KUMAR HRISHIKESH, DR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-III, SURAT DATED 24 -05-2007 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-III, SURAT HAS ERRED IN DELETI NG AN ADDITION OF RS.54,33,857/- OUT OF INTEREST EXPENSES MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-III, SURAT HAS ERRED IN DIRECTI NG THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW DEDUCTION U/S. 80 IB OF THE I. T. ACT ON THE DEAS MACHINE. 3. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CAS E AND IN LAW, THE LD. CIT(A)-III, SURAT HAS NOT APPRECIATED THE FACT THAT THE ACTION OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS O N RIGHT TRACT FOR DENYING T4HE DEDUCTION U/S. 80 IB OF THE ACT ON THE DEAS MACHINES AS DISCUSSED IN DETAIL IN THE ORD ER PASSED U/S. 143(3) OF THE ACT, ON 23.02.2006. ITA NO.3189/AHD/2007 M/S. SAHAJANAND TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD. 2 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ON THE ABOVE GROUNDS OF APPE AL NOTED THAT BOTH THE ISSUES ARE COVERED BY HIS ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AND ACCORDINGLY ADDITIONS WERE DELETED AND THE APPEAL O F THE ASSESSEE WAS ALLOWED. THE ASSESSEE FILED WRITTEN SUBMISSION IN W HICH IT WAS MENTIONED THAT BOTH THE GROUNDS OF DEPARTMENTAL APPEALS ARE C OVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF ITAT AHMEDABAD BENCH I N ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 IN ITA NO.82/AHD/2 007 DATED 08-01-2010. COPY OF THE ORDER IS PLACED ON RECORD. THE LEARNED DR CONCEDED THAT THE GROUNDS OF THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEA L ARE COVERED AGAINST THE REVENUE BY THE ABOVE ORDER OF THE TRIBU NAL. 3. IN THIS VIEW OF THE MATTER, WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT ALL THE GROUNDS ARE COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO.82/AHD/2007 (SUPRA). THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOLLOWED HIS ORDER FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 AND ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. THE TRIBUNAL DISMISSED THE DEPARTMENT AL APPEAL FOR THE SAME ASSESSMENT YEAR VIDE ORDER DATED 08-01-2010(SU PRA). ALL THE ISSUES IN THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL ARE ACCORDINGLY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. AS A RESULT, THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL FAILS AND I S DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON 09-04-2010 SD/- SD/- (N. S. SAINI) ACOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 09-04-2010 LAKSHMIKANT/- ITA NO.3189/AHD/2007 M/S. SAHAJANAND TECHNOLOGY PVT. LTD. 3 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER D Y. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD