ITO, Nahan V. M/s Sai Bliss Drugs & Pharmaceuticals, Paonta Sahib

ITA 532/CHANDI/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 125 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1237 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 7 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-09-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: SMC
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 27-04-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: YOGINDER MITTAL
• Keywords: Tax effect

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCHES SMD, CHANDIGARH BEFORE MS. DIVA SINGH, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND DR. B.R.R.KUMAR, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO. 532/CHD/2018 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2013-14 THE ITO, VS M/S SAI BLISS DRUGS & NAHAN. PHARMACEUTICALS, VILLAGE GONDPUR,PAONTA SAHIB, DISTT. SIRMOUR (HP). PAN : ABCFS9508C (A PPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI YOGINDER MITTAL, ADDL. CIT RESPONDENT BY : NONE DATE OF HEARING : 12.07.2018 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.09.2018 ORDER PER DIVA SINGH THE PRESENT APPEAL HAS BEEN FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ASS AILING THE CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 08.02.2018 OF CIT(A) SHIMLA PERTAINING TO 2013-14 ASSESSMENT YEAR ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN DELETING THE ADDITION OF RS.25,89,840/- MADE BY THE A.O. BY RESTRICTING THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE TO 25% AS AGAINST THE 100% CLAIM MADE IN THE 7 TH YEAR, IGNORING THE FACT THAT UNITS WHICH COMMENCED PRODUCTION AFTER 07 .01.2003 CAN'T CARRY OUT MULTIPLE 'SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSION' AS PER PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80-IC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT AND AS EXPLAINED IN CBDT CIRCULAR NO. 07/20 03. 2. ON THE FACTS AND IN THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE , THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN HOLDING THAT THERE CAN BE MORE THAN ONE 'INITIAL AS SESSMENT YEAR' FOR AVAILING THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT. IN OTHER WORDS, THE ASSESSEE CAN FIRST CLAIM DEDUCTION FROM THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR, BEING THE YEAR OF SETTING UP OF THE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING AN D, THEREAFTER, ONCE AGAIN CLAIM THE DEDUCTION FROM ANOTHER INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR, BEING THE ASSESSMENT YEAR IN WHICH THE ASSESSEE CARRIES OUT SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSION OF ITS UNDERTAKING. 2. AT THE TIME OF HEARING, NO ONE WAS PRESENT ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER, SINCE THE RELIEF HAS BEEN GRANTED TO THE ASSESS EE BY THE CIT(A) RELYING UPON THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF STOVEKRAFT OF INDIA VS CIT 160 DTR 378, IT WAS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE TO PROCEED WITH THE APPEAL EX-PARTE QUA THE ASSESSEE RES PONDENT ON MERITS. THE LD. SR.DR HAS BEEN HEARD. THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN VIEW OF THE DECISION OF THE APEX COURT I.E. C IT VS CLASSIC ITA -532/CHD/2018 A.Y. 2013-14 PAGE 2 OF 2 BINDING INDUSTRIES (2018) 96 TAXMANN.COM 405 (S.C) IS NO LON GER GOOD LAW. HOWEVER, EVEN OTHERWISE IT IS SEEN THAT THE TAX EFFEC T INVOLVED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS MUCH BELOW THE STIPULATED AMOUNT OF RS . 20 LACS AS PER THE LATEST CBDT CIRCULAR NO.3/2018 DATED 11.07.2018 DIRECT ING THE TAX AUTHORITIES TO WITHDRAW/NOT PRESS THE APPEALS WHEREIN TH E TAX EFFECT IS LESS THAN THE SAID AMOUNT. ACCORDINGLY, IN THE LIGHT OF TH E FACTS AS SET OUT HEREIN ABOVE, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. SAID O RDER WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING ITSELF. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 04.09. 2018. SD/- SD/- ( DR.B.R.R.KUMAR) ( DIVA SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER 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.