DCIT, CHENNAI V. G.R.Thangamaligai Jewellers P. Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 805/CHNY/2014

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 77337 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-06-2014
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Next Hearing Date: 09-06-2014
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 03-04-2014
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: GURU BHASHYAM IRS J
• Keywords: Depreciation; Unabsorbed depreciation
• Section: 143(3)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . . . , !' , # $! % BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT & SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ I.T.A. NO.805/MDS/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-2009) THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIRCLE III(3), CHENNAI 600 034. ( '& /APPELLANT) VS M/S. G.R. THANGAMALIGAI JEWELLERS PRIVATE LTD, NO.136, USMAN ROAD, T. NAGAR, CHENNAI 600 017. [PAN :AAACR 3582R) ( '('& /RESPONDENT) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI. GURU BHASHYAM, IRS, JCIT-DR / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI. PHILIP GEORGE, ADVOCATE /DATE OF HEARING : 09.06.2014 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 09.06.2014. $) / O R D E R PER DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2008-2009. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-II AT CHENNAI ON 27.11.2013. I.T.A.NO.805/MDS/2014. . :- 2 -: THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETED U/S. 143(3) OF T HE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE ONLY GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS FAILED TO APPRECIATE TH E FACT THAT AS PER THE PROVISIONS OF SEC. 80IA(5), HAD THE ASSESSEE MA INTAINED A SEPARATE ACCOUNT OF THE WINDMILL UNDERTAKING FROM THE INITIA L ASSESSMENT YEAR. THE UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION WOULD STILL BE AVAILABL E FOR SET OFF AND THE ASSESSEE WOULD NOT HAVE EARNED PROFIT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 80IA. THEREFORE, IT IS THE CASE OF THE REVENUE THAT THE C OMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING DEDUCTIO N U/S.80IA. 3. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS DECIDED THIS ISSUE FOLLOWING THE DECISION OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF M/S. VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS & OT HERS VS. ACIT 232 CTR 368. THEREFORE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMIT Y IN THIS ORDER. 4. IN RESULT, THIS APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMI SSED. I.T.A.NO.805/MDS/2014. . :- 3 -: ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME O F HEARING ON MONDAY, THE 9 TH OF JUNE, 2014 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( !' ) (VIKAS AWASTHY) # $! / JUDICIAL MEMBER ( . . . ) (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) / VICE PRESIDENT DATED:9 TH JUNE, 2014. K.V !' #$ %$ /COPY TO: 1. & APPELLANT 2. / RESPONDENT 3. ' ( )/CIT(A) 4. ' /CIT 5. $() * /DR 6. )+ , /GF.