M/s Shirkar Hotel Pvt. Ltd., Lucknow V. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Lucknow

ITA 487/LKW/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 48723714 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 18 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 16-01-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 01-12-2014
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 29-05-2014
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Competent authority

Judgement Text

1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A, LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.K. GARODIA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS.487 & 488/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2007 - 08 & 2010 - 11 M/S SHIRKAR HOTEL PVT. LTD., 6, SHAHNAJAF ROAD, LUCKNOW. PAN:AAFCS4475D VS. DY.C.I.T., RANGE - VI, LUCKNOW. (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) ITA NOS.657 & 658/LKW/2014 ASSESSMENT YEARS:2007 - 08 & 2010 - 11 DY.C.I.T., RANGE - VI, LUCKNOW. VS. M/S SHIRKAR HOTEL PVT. LTD., 6, SHAHNAJAF ROAD, LUCKNOW. PAN:AAFCS4475D (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) O R D E R PER A. K. GARODIA, A.M. THESE ARE CROSS APPEALS FOR TWO YEARS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AND THE REVENUE, WHICH ARE DIRECTED AGAINST TWO SEPARATE ORDERS OF CIT(A) - II, LUCKNOW, BOTH DATED 10/04/2014 FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007 - 2008 & 2010 - 2011. A LL THESE APPEALS WERE HEARD TOGETHER AND ARE BEING DISPOSED OF BY WAY OF THIS COMMON ORDER FOR THE SAKE OF CONVENIENCE. ASSESSEE BY SHRI AKSHAY GUPTA, C. A. REVENUE BY SHRI Y. P. SRIVASTAVA, D. R. DATE OF HEARING 01/12/2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT 1 6 /01/2015 2 2. IN BOTH THE YEARS, THE ASSESSEE HAS RAISED A CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(A) OF THE ACT IN ITS RETURN OF INCOME, WHICH WAS DISALLOWED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER IN BOTH THE YEARS ON THE GROUND THAT THE ASSESSEE DID NOT POSSESS APPROVAL FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(A) FROM THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY. WHEN THE ASSESSEE CARRIED THE MATTER IN APPEAL BEFORE CIT(A) FOR BOTH THE YEARS, AN ALTERNATIVE CLAIM WAS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) ALSO AND COPY OF APPROVAL FROM COMPETENT AUTHORITY FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) WAS PLACED BEFORE THE CIT(A). THE CIT(A) TOOK COGNIZANCE OF THIS CERTIFICATE AND HELD THAT ALTHOUGH THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(A) BUT HE ALLOWED CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) OF THE ACT. NOW THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US IN BOTH THE YEARS AGAINST THIS DECISION OF CIT(A) FOR GRANTING DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) OF THE ACT WHEREAS TH E ASSESSEE IS IN APPEAL BEFORE US FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(A) OF THE ACT. 3. IT WAS FAIRLY AGREED BY BOTH THE SIDES THAT BOTH THESE ISSUES RAISED BY BOTH THE SIDES IN THESE APPEALS ARE COVERED BY THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10 IN I.T.A. NO.744 & 745/LKW/11 AND 344/LKW/2013 ALONG WITH I.T.A. NO.758 & 759/LKW/11 AND 414/LKW/2013 DATED 16 TH MAY 2014. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE COPY OF THE TRIBUNAL DECISION IS AVAILABLE ON PAGES 24 TO 32 OF THE PAPER BOOK. 4. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS AND GONE THROUGH THE TRIBUNAL ORDER IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10. WE FIND THAT AS PER THIS TRIBUNAL ORDER, IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(A) OF THE ACT IN THE ABSENCE OF APPROVAL FROM THE COMPETENT AUTHORITY IN THIS REGARD BUT REGARDING DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) OF THE ACT , IT WAS HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED APPROVAL FROM THE CO MPETENT AUTHORITY FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) OF THE ACT AND REMAND REPORT WAS OBTAINED BY 3 CIT(A) IN THIS REGARD, THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) OF THE ACT. 5. IN THE PRESENT TWO YEARS ALSO, THE FACTS ARE IDENTICAL. IN THE PRESENT YEARS, THE CIT(A) HAS REFERRED TO THE ORDER OF CIT(A) FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10 AND BY FOLLOWING THIS ORDER OF CIT(A), HE HAS DIRECTED THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO ALLOW DEDUCTION U/S 80IB(7)(B) OF THE ACT @30% OF THE PROFIT, WHICH IS A LLOWABLE AS THE ASSESSEE HAS OBTAINED APPROVAL FROM PRESCRIBED AUTHORITY. THE ORDER OF CIT(A) HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND HENCE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY REASON TO TAKE A CONTRARY VIEW IN THESE TWO YEARS BECAUSE NO DIFFERENCE IN FACTS C OULD BE POINTE D OUT BY ANY OF THE SIDES. HENCE, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE EARLIER TRIBUNAL ORDER FOR 2006 - 07, 2008 - 09 AND 2009 - 10, WE APPROVE THE ORDER OF CIT(A) IN THE PRESENT TWO YEARS ALSO, WHICH ARE IN LINE WITH THIS TRIBUNAL DECISION. 6. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS REVENUE ARE DISMISSED. (ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONED ON THE CAPTION PAGE) SD/. SD/. (SUNIL KUMAR YADAV) ( A. K. GARODIA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATED: 1 6 /01/2015 *C.L.SINGH COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT. 3. CONCERNED CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. D.R., I.T.A.T., LUCKNOW ASSTT. REGISTRAR