M/s. Shubham Feed Mills, Uttrakhand V. ITO- I, Uttrakhand

ITA 378/DEL/2013

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3520 (ITAT-DELHI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: G
• Next Hearing Date: 10-04-2017
• Assessment Year: 2009-2010
• Appeal Filed On: 21-01-2013
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: BEDOBANI CHOUDHARY
• Assessee Lawyers: SUBHASH CHANDRA AGGARWAL
• Section: 142(1); 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH G, NEW DELHI BEFORE SH. R. K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. BEENA A. PILLAI, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO. 378/DEL/2013 (ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2009-10) A APPELLANT BY : SH. SUBHASH CHANDRA AGGARWAL, ADV. RESPONDENT BY : SH. BEDOBANI CHOUDHARY, SR.DR DATE OF HEARING : 10-04-2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18-04-2017 O R D E R PER BEENA A. PILLAI, J.M : 1. THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY ASSESSEE AGAI NST ORDER DATED 09.10.2012 PASSED BY LD.CIT(A)-2, DEHRA DUN FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10, ON FOLLOWING GROUNDS OF AP PEAL: 1. THAT INCOME DISALLOWED OF RS. 3,09,1497- BY U/S 80IC IS ILLEGAL ARBITRARY AND UNJUST. 2. THAT THE INCOME RS. 3,09,1497- IS BORN UP BY T HE SAME UNIT ITSELF. 3. THAT THE INTEREST CHARGED IS QUITE ILLEGAL U/S 234 B & C BECAUSE THE APPLICANT WAS UNKNOWN SO MUCH INCOME WILL BE FRAME. 4. THAT THE A/C PARTNER MAHENDRA GARG WAS ILL SO THE 2 ND APPEAL COULD NOT FIELD IN TIME THE APPLICATION FOR CONDO NATION FOR DELAY IN FILLING OF APPEAL, IS ALSO ENCLOSED WITH THE GOA. SHUBHAM FEED MILLS BERIA ROAD, BAZPUR UTTRAKHAND. VS. ITO KASHIPUR UTTRAKHAND GIR/PAN: A BGFS8750G (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) 2 ITA NO. 378/DEL/2013 (AY 2009-10) 2. BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE AS UNDER: ASSESSEE FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOME ON 29.09.2010 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME OF RUPEES NIL. NOTICE UNDER SECTION 142(1) AND 143(2) WAS ISSUED AND SERVED UPON ASSESS EE. REPRESENTATIVES OF ASSESSEE APPEARED AND DISCUSSED CASE DURING ASSESSMENT PROCEEDINGS. 3. IT WAS OBSERVED BY ASSESSING OFFICER THAT, RS.3,09 ,149/- AS QUALIFYING FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC. ON FURTHER VERIFICATION ASSESSING OFFICER OBSERVED THAT THIS I NCOME HAS BEEN DECLARED ON SALE OF BARDANA. ASSESSING OFFICER WAS OF THE OPINION THAT SINCE INCOME WAS NOT DERIVED FROM BUSI NESS OF MANUFACTURING OF CATTLE FOOD THIS AMOUNT DO NOT QUA LIFY TO BE INCLUDABLE FOR THE PURPOSES OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECT ION 80IC. HE ACCORDINGLY DISALLOWED DEDUCTION UNDER 80IC ON RS.3,09,149/-. AGGRIEVED BY ADDITION MADE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFORE LD. CIT(A), WHO UPHELD ADDITION BY RELYING UPON DECISION OF HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF STERLING FOODS REPORTED IN 237 ITR 53 AND PANDIAN CHEMICALS L TD., REPORTED IN 262 ITR 278. AGGRIEVED BY ORDER OF LD. CIT(A) ASSESSEE IS IN APP EAL BEFORE US NOW. GROUND NO. 1 AND 2 4. LD. AR SUBMITTED THAT ASSESSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY OF CATTLE FOODS. HE SUBMITTE D THAT RAW MATERIALS FOR MANUFACTURE OF CATTLE FOOD COMES IN P ACKED CONDITION, WHICH IS UNPACKED AND BAGS/BARDANA IS SE PARATED FROM RAW MATERIALS. THE RAW MATERIAL IS THEN PROCES SED AND 3 ITA NO. 378/DEL/2013 (AY 2009-10) FINAL PRODUCT IS REPACKED IN PRINTED BARDANA/PACKET S CARRYING ASSESSEES NAME WHICH IS SOLD IN MARKET. LD. AR SUB MITTED THAT SOME ACCUMULATED BARDANAS WERE SOLD IN MARKET , WHICH WAS SHOWN AS OTHER INCOME. HE SUBMITTED THAT SINC E THESE BANDANNAS ARE USED FOR ACTIVITY CARRIED ON BY ASSES SEE, INCOME ON SALE OF SUCH BARADANAS IS TO BE CONSIDER ED FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC, AS THE SAME IS DERIV ED FROM AND ATTRIBUTED TO THE MAIN BUSINESS ACTIVITY. 5. WE HAVE PERUSED SUBMISSIONS ADVANCED BY BOTH SIDES IN THE LIGHT OF RECORDS PLACED BEFORE US AND DECISIONS RELIED UPON BY BOTH SIDES. 6. IN OUR CONSIDERED VIEW CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SE CTION 80IC IS ON INCOME GENERATED THROUGH PRODUCTS MANUFA CTURED AND SOLD BY ASSESSEE, IN WHICH ASSESSEE DEALS. ON T HE FACE OF FACTS ON RECORD THE SUBMISSIONS BY ASSESSEE BEFORE AUTHORITIES BELOW IT IS OBSERVED THAT UNUSED PACKETS/BARDANAS S OLD BY ASSESSEE IN MARKET. THESE ARE UNUSED BARDANAS RECE IVED FROM PACKETS IN WHICH RAW MATERIALS REACHED ASSESSEE. TH IS PER SE DOES NOT HAVE ANY CONNECTION WITH THE SALE OF MANUF ACTURED PRODUCT BY ASSESSEE. LD. CIT(A) WAS THEREFORE, RIGH T IN NOT ALLOWING CLAIM OF INCLUSION OF RS. 3,09,149/-, BEIN G SALES OF UNUSED PACKETS/BARDANAS AS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC. ACCORDINGLY, THIS GROUND RAISED BY AS SESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. GROUND NO. 3 7. THIS GROUND IS CONSEQUENTIAL IN NATURE, AND THEREF ORE, DO NOT REQUIRE TO BE ADJUDICATED UPON. 4 ITA NO. 378/DEL/2013 (AY 2009-10) GROUND NO. 4 8. THIS GROUND IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT REQU IRE ANY ADJUDICATION. IN THE RESULT APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 18 TH APRIL, 2017. SD/- SD/- (R. K.PANDA) (BEENA A. PILLAI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE: 18.04.2017 @M!T