MDS WIND FRMS PRIVATE LIMITED, POLLACHI V. ITO CORPORATE WARD 2, COIMBATORE

ITA 649/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2022] 105 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2432 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 2 month(s) 21 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-05-2022
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2013-2014
• Appeal Filed On: 20-02-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Keywords: Depreciation; Set aside

Judgement Text

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण ‘डी’ ायपीठ चे ई म । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL ‘D’ BENCH, CHENNAI माननीय ,ी महावीर िसंह, उपा23 एवं माननीय ,ी मनोज कु मार अ8वाल ,लेखा सद; के सम3। BEFORE HON’BLE SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH, VICE PRESIDENT AND HON’BLE SHRI MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL, AM आयकर अपील सं./ ITA No.649/Chny/2018 (िनधाCरण वषC / Assessment Year: 2013-14) M/s. MDS Wind Farms Pvt. Ltd. 75/1, Dr. Ansari Street Pollachi – 642 001. बनाम/ V s. ITO, Corporate Ward-2, Coimbatore. थायी लेखा सं./जीआइ आर सं./P AN /GI R No . AAH C M -8 7 4 4 - M (अपीलाथ /Appellant) : ( थ / Respondent) अपीलाथ की ओरसे/ Appellant by : Shri T. Banusekar (CA) - Ld. AR थ की ओरसे/Respondent by : Shri G. Johnson (Addl. CIT) –Ld. DR सुनवाई की तारीख/ Date o f Hea rin g : 05-05-2022 घोषणा की तारीख / Date of Pronouncement : 12-05-2022 आदेश / O R D E R Manoj Kumar Aggarwal (Accountant Member) 1. Aforesaid appeal by assessee for Assessment Year (AY) 2013-14 arises out of the order of learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore [CIT(A)] dated 07-12-2017 in the matter of assessment framed by Ld. Assessing Officer [AO] u/s.143(3) of the Act on 15-02-2016. The Ld. AR submitted that the main issue is denial of deduction u/s 80-IA. It was submitted that the erstwhile firm Meenakshi ITA No.649/Chny/2018 - 2 - Distribution Service got converted into a corporate entity and it was not a case of splitting-up or reconstruction of business as wrongly understood by lower authorities. In the said background, Ld. AR pleaded to restore the matter back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh consideration on the ground that no independent findings have been rendered in the impugned order. To support the argument, Ld. AR placed on record the details of partnership and company as under: - DETAILS OF PARTNERSHIP / COMPANY Date Name of the Firm / Company PAN No. Partners / Shareholders Nature of Business Remarks 29.09.2007 Meenakshi Distribution Service AAOFM6571E V. Ramanathan C. Kannathal N. Bhuvaneswari T. Kalyani 1. Pharmaceutical Retailing 2. Windmill Refer Page 2 11.03.2012 Deed of Reconstituti on of old firm and name change as MDS Wind Farms (Formerly known as Meenakshi Distribution Service with PAN: AAOFM657 1E) AAOFM6571E V.Ramanathan V.Narayanan V.Chinniah T.Kalyani RM.Vasanthi N.Bhuvaneswari C.Kannathal 1. Pharmaceutical Retailing (included in objects but never carried on) 2. Windmill Reconstitution of existing firm with admission of new partners and change of name. (Refer pages 11 and 15) 23.03.2012 MDS Wind Farms Pvt. Ltd. [Conversion of MDS Wind Farms under Part IX of the Companies Act, 1956] AAHCM8744M V.Ramanathan V.Narayanan V.Chinniah T.Kalyani RM.Vasanthi N.Bhuvaneswari C.Kannathal Wind Energy Generation and Sale MOA refers to the partnership deed dated 29.09.2007 and the deed dated 11.03.2012 for change in name and admission of partners (Refer pages 19 and 20) ITA No.649/Chny/2018 - 3 - The Ld. Sr. DR submitted that the relevant facts are not available on record. Having gone through the orders of lower authorities, our adjudication would be as under. 2. The assessee being resident corporate entity was assessed u/s 143(3) on 15.02.2016. The assessee was engaged in the business of wind energy generation and sale. The assessee company was formed on 23.03.2012 and it claimed deduction u/s 80-IA for Rs.57.55 Lacs. However, Ld. AO denied the same on the allegation that the assessee did not fulfil the conditions of Sec.80-IA(3) as well as Sec.80-IA(5). Another issue that cropped up was claim of higher depreciation while computing Book Profit u/s 115JB. The Ld. AO denied the same. Though the assessee preferred further appeal before first appellate authority, however, the Ld. CIT(A) merely endorsed the stand of Ld. AO in paras 5 & 6 of the impugned order and dismissed the appeal. Aggrieved, the assessee is in further appeal before us, 3. After going through the impugned order, we find that Ld. CIT(A) has not rendered any independent findings and merely endorsed the view of Ld. AO. Keeping in view the submissions made before us, we deem it fit to set aside the impugned order and restore both the issues back to the file of Ld. AO for fresh consideration. The assessee is directed to demonstrate that it was entitled for deduction u/s 80-IA and also justify claim of higher depreciation u/s 115JB. Needless to add that adequate opportunity of hearing shall be granted to the assessee. ITA No.649/Chny/2018 - 4 - 4. The appeal stand allowed for statistical purposes. Order pronounced on 12 th May, 2022. Sd/- (MAHAVIR SINGH) उपा23 /VICE PRESIDENT Sd/- (MANOJ KUMAR AGGARWAL) लेखा सद; / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER चे*ई / Chennai; िदनांक / Dated : 12-05-2022 EDN/- आदेश की Wितिलिप अ 8ेिषत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ /Appellant 2. यथ /Respondent 3. आयकर आयु (अपील)/CIT(A) 4. आयकर आयु /CIT 5. िवभागीय ितिनिध/DR 6. गाड फाईल/GF