M/s Vanser Metallics, Chandigarh V. DCIT, Parwanoo

ITA 493/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 128 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5099 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-06-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2012-2013
• Appeal Filed On: 16-03-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHANDIGARH BENCHES, SMC, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NO.493/CHD/2017 ASSE SSMENT YEAR: 2012-13 M/S VANSER METALLICS, VS. THE DCIT, 313, INDUSTRIAL AREA, CIRCLE, PHASE-II, PARWANOO CHANDIGARH. PAN NO. AAEFV7622H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 27.04.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07.06.2017 ORDER THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE A SSAILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 27.10.2016 OF CIT (APPEALS) SHIMLA (HP) PERTAINING TO 2012-13 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THE ID. CIT(A) IS WRONG IN DISALLOWING THE BENEFIT OF SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSION U/S 80IC(2) AND CONFIRMING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IC ONLY TO THE EXTENT OF 25% AS AGAINST 100% BY HOLDING THAT BENEFIT OF SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSI ON IS ALLOWABLE ONLY TO THE UNDERTAKING WHICH WERE EXISTING AS ON 07.01.2003. 2. IN VIEW OF ABOVE & SUCH OTHER GROUNDS, WHICH MAY BE TAKEN AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE APPEAL MAY PLEASE BE ALLOWED & JUSTICE RENDERED . 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, AN ADJOURNMENT APPLICATI ON WAS MOVED ON BEHALF OF THE REVENUE SEEKING TIME ON THE GROUND THAT THE SR.DR I S OUT OF STATION. THE LD. AR INVITING ATTENTION TO THE MATERIAL AVAILABLE ON REC ORD, SPECIFICALLY THE IMPUGNED ORDER, SUBMITTED THAT THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE THAT THERE WAS SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSION IN 2010-11 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON ACCOUNT OF WHICH U/S 80I C DEDUCTION CLAIMED TO THE EXTENT OF 100% OF ELIGIBLE PROFITS WAS REJECTED HOL DING THAT THE ACTIVITIES OF MANUFACTURING CR STRIPS & TUBES/TRADING OF HR COULS & CR COILS ETC. COMMENCED W.E.F. 20.12.2004 AND WITH 2005-06 ASSESSMENT YEAR AS THE INITIAL YEAR, THE FIVE YEARS PERIOD OF CLAIMING FULL DEDUCTION WAS COMPLETED IN 2009-10 ASSESSMENT YEAR. THUS, 100% DEDUCTION IN THE 6 TH YEAR WAS RESTRICTED TO 25% BY THE AO. THE LD. CIT( APPEALS) RELYING UPON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF M /S HYCRON ELECTRONICS VS ITO ITA NO. 798/CHD/2012 HAS DISMISSED THE ASSESSEE'S APPEA L. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE ASSESSEE WOULD BE CHALLENGING THE ISSUE BEFORE THE HON'BLE HIGH COURT. HOWEVER, AS FAR AS THE PRESENT FORUM IS CONCERNED, IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE 2 ISSUE STANDS DECIDED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE. THUS, I T WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL REQUEST MAY BE REJECTED. 3. I HAVE HEARD SUBMISSIONS AND PERUSED THE MATERIA L AVAILABLE ON RECORD. I FIND THAT THE PRESENT YEAR IS FULLY COVERED AGAINST THE ASSESSEE BY VIRTUE OF THE SAID DECISION PASSED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH DATED 27.0 5.2015 IN ITA NO. 798/CHD/2012. THE POSITION ON FACTS IS NOT DISPUTE D BY THE ASSESSEE AND IT IS ONLY STATED THAT MENTION BE MADE THAT THE ISSUE IS BEING CARRIED FURTHER AND THE ASSESSEE MAY NOT BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE GIVEN UP ITS CLAIM. T AKING NOTE OF THE CONCERN OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE ABSENCE OF ANY CHANGE EITHER IN FAC TS OR LAW, RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT, THE GROUND OF APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. SAID ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON THE DATE OF HEARING ITSELF IN THE OPE N COURT 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMIS SED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 7 TH JUNE,2017. SD/- (DIVA SINGH) JUDICIAL MEMBER POONAM COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT,CHANDIGARH