The Income-tax Officer, Jammu V. M/s. Shiv Shakti Metals, Jammu

ITA 580/ASR/2014

• Counselvise Citation: 58020914 RSA 2014
• Duration Of Justice: 11 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: DB
• Next Hearing Date: 10-06-2015
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 29-09-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: TARSEM LAL
• Section: 143(3); 80IB

Judgement Text

I.T.A. NO. 580 /ASR/201 4 , ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 PAGE 1 OF 2 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR [CORAM: PRAMOD KUMAR AM AND A.D. JAIN JM] I.T.A. NO. 580 /ASR/201 4 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 INCOME TAX OFFICER ..APPELLANT WARD 1(3), JAMMU. VS. SHIV SHAKTI META L S, RESPONDENT SIDCO, INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX, CANAL ROAD, BARI BRAHMNA, JAMMU. [PAN: ABGFS 8493 Q] APPEARANCES BY: TARSEM LAL FOR THE APPELLANT NONE FOR THE RESPONDENT DATE OF CONCLUDING THE HEARING: JUNE 10 , 2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCING THE ORDER : AUG UST 31 , 2015 O R D E R PER PRAMOD KUMAR: 1. BY WAY OF THIS APPEAL, THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS CHALLENGED CORRECTNESS OF THE ORDER DATED 31 ST JULY 2014 PASSED BY THE LEARNED CIT(A) IN THE MATTER OF ASSESSMENT UNDER SECTION 143(3) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (THE ACT HEREINAFTER) , FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011 - 12, ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. WHETHER THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) JAMMU W A S RIGHT IN LAW TO ALLOW DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 ON CENTRAL EXCISE DUTY REFUND BY R ELYING UPON THE JUDGEMENT OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT OF J&K IN THE CASE OF M/S SHREE BALAJI ALLOYS & OTHERS AND IGNORING THE RATIO OF THE LAW ON THE ISSUE A S LAID DOWN IN THE CASE OF PONNI SUGAR & SAWHNEY STEEL AND PRESS WORKS LTD. 2. WHETHER THE COMMISSIO NER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) JAMMU COMMITTED AN ERROR IN L A W IN NOT FOLLOWING THE LAW S L A ID DOWN BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN I.T.A. NO. 580 /ASR/201 4 , ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2011 - 12 PAGE 2 OF 2 THE CASE OF PONNI SUGAR & SAWHNEY STEEL AND PRESS WORKS LTD . , WHEREIN SIMILAR RECEIPTS WERE HELD TO BE REVENUE IN NATURE AS THE SAME HAD BEEN MADE AFTER THE INDUSTRIES H A D BEEN SET UP AND NOT FOR PURPOSE OF SETTING UP OF THE INDUSTRIES. 3. WHETHER IN LAW THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), JAMMU W A S RIGHT IN NOT APPRECIATING A ND APPLYING THE PURPOSE TEST AS LAID DOWN BY THE JUDGEMENTS OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF ASSESSEE AS THE MONEY RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE ON ACCOUNT OF CENTRAL EXCISE WAS NOT S UPPOSED TO BE SPENT IN A PARTICULAR MANNER OR FOR THE PURPOSE OF SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSION OF THE INDUSTRY. 2. NONE APPEARED FOR THE ASSESSE BUT WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED REPRESENTATIVES, PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD AND DULY CONSIDERED FACTS OF THE CASE IN THE LIGHT OF THE APPLICABLE LEGAL POSITION. 3. LEARNED D EPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE FAIRLY AGREE S THAT THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESS E E BY HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURTS JUDGMENT IN THE CASE OF SHRI BALAJI ALLOYS & ORS VS CIT [(2011) 333 ITR 335 (J&K)], EVEN AS HE RELIED UPON THE STAND OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 4. RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWIN G THE ESTEEMED VIEWS OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE CONFIRM THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) ON THIS ISSUE AND DECLINE TO INTERFERE IN THE MATTER. 5 . IN THE RESULT, WHILE APPEAL IS DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT TODAY ON THE 31 ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2015. SD/XX SD/XX A D JAIN PRAMOD KUMAR (JUDICIAL MEMBER) (ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) DATED THE 31 ST DAY OF AUGUST, 2015 C OPIES TO: (1) THE APPELLANT (2) THE RESPONDENT (3) COMMISSIONER (4) CIT(A) (5) DR (6) GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH, AMRITSAR