Sh. Bhavesh T Prasana, Parwanoo V. DCIT, Parwanoo

ITA 869/CHANDI/2017

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 127 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 6758 (ITAT-CHANDIGARH)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-09-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2014-2015
• Appeal Filed On: 26-05-2017
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHRI

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DIVISION BENCH A, CHANDIGARH BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND MS.ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO.869/CHD/2017 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2014-15) SH.BHAVNESH T PARASANA, VS. THE D.C.I.T., PLOT NO.78, SECTOR-1, CIRCLE-PARWANOO. PARWANOO, H.P. HIMACHAL PRADESH. PAN: AJSPP0728K (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI MANOJ KUMAR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI PANKAJ KUMAR SHARMA, ADDL.CIT DR DATE OF HEARING : 27.09.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 27.09.2017 ORDER PER SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS APPEAL HAS BEEN PREFERRED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAI NST THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX(APPEALS )-, SHIMLA (HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS CIT(A)) DATED 29.3.2017 RELATING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15. 2. COMING TO THE MERITS OF THE CASE, BOTH THE LD REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PARTIES HAVE FAIRLY AGREED T HAT THE ISSUE ADDRESSED IN THE PRESENT APPEAL IS IDENTICAL TO WHAT HAS BEEN DECIDED BY THE CO-ORDINATE BENCH IN ITA NO . 798/CHD/2012 IN THE CASE OF HYCRON ELECTRONICS VS I TO. 3. THE RELEVANT FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS ENGAGED IN THE MANUFACTURING OF LIQUID W.E.F. 23.1 1.2006 AND THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR FOR CLAIM OF DEDUCT ION U/S 80IC OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 (IN SHORT THE ACT ) WAS ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. THE ASSESSEE HAS ALREADY 2 CLAIMED DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IC OF THE ACT TO THE EXTENT OF 100% ELIGIBLE PROFIT FOR FIVE YEARS PERI OD FROM ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 TO 2011-12. THE ASSESSEE H AD AGAIN CLAIMED 100% DEDUCTION AGAINST ELIGIBLE PROFI T IN THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR 2014-15, WHICH WAS 8 TH YEAR OF PRODUCTION BY CLAIMING SUBSTANTIAL EXPANSION OF THE UNIT IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2010-11. RELYING UPON THE AFORESAID DECISION OF THE ITAT IN THE CASE OF HYCRO N ELECTRONICS (SUPRA), THE CLAIM WAS REJECTED BY THE LOWER AUTHORITIES. IN THE AFOREMENTIONED PECULIAR FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES, SINCE THE ISSUE ON FACTS AND LAW AS PER SUBMISSIONS OF THE PARTIES IS IDENTICAL AND WE FIND THE SUBMISSIONS TO BE CORRECT; ACCORDINGLY, RESPECTFULL Y FOLLOWING THE PRECEDENT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS REJECTED. 4. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 27.09.2017. SD/- SD/- (ANNAPURNA GUPTA) (SANJAY GARG) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED 27 TH SEPTEMBER, 2017 *RATI* COPY TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT 4. THE CIT(A) 5. THE DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, CHANDIGARH