DCIT, CHENNAI V. Protectron Electromech (P) Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 875/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 132 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8932 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 06-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 05-04-2016
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: N DEVANATHAN

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH, CHENNAI , ! ' . #$ , % &' BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER ./ ITA NO. 875/MDS/2016 / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2011-12 & C.O. NO.75/MDS/2016 THE DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CORPORATE CIRCLE-5(2), CHENNAI 34. APPELLANT) V. M/S. PROTECTRON ELECTROMECH P. LTD., NO.9, ATHIPATTAN STREET, MOUNT ROAD, CHENNAI 600 002. PAN AABCP1103B RESPONDENT/CROSS-OBJECTOR) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI A.V.SREEKANTH, JCIT / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI N. DEVANATHAN, ADVOCATE ! / DATE OF HEARING : 09.06.2016 '# ! / DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 06.07.2016 ( / O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER THE APPEAL BY THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTIO N BY THE ASSESSEE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER - - ITA 875 & CO 75/16 2 OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) DATED 28.1.2016 FOR THE ASSE SSMENT YEAR 2011-12. 2. THE REVENUE HAS RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 2. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER NOT TO SET OFF THE LOSSES PERTAIN ING TO THE YEARS PRIOR TO THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR WHIL E COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S.80IA. 3. THE LD. CIT(APPEALS) ERRED IN RELYING ON THE CA SE OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS (P) LTD. V. ACIT (2010) 231 ITR (MAD) 368. IN THIS CASE THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED SPECIAL LEAVE PETITION BEFORE THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. 3. AFTER HEARING THE PARTIES, WE ARE OF THE OPINION THAT THIS ISSUE WAS CONSIDERED BY THIS TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN ITA NO. 157/MDS/2013 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2009-10 FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF T HE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VELAYUDHAS WAMY SPINNING MILLS (P) LTD. V. ACIT (231 ITR 368) AND V IDE ITS ORDER DATED 11.4.2013, IT WAS HELD AS UNDER : 7. WE HAVE PERUSED THE ORDERS AND HEARD THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER LOSS PRIOR TO INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR SELECTED BY AN ASSESSEE TO CLAIM DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80-IB OF THE ACT HAS TO BE SET OFF WHILE COMPUTING THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80-IA OF THE ACT. WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE H AS ALREADY BEEN DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF ASSESSEE BY HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF VELAYUDHASWAMY SPINNING MILLS (SUPRA). LD. - - ITA 875 & CO 75/16 3 CIT(APPEALS) HAS FAIRLY APPRECIATED THIS DECISION A ND DELETED THE DISALLOWANCE MADE BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER. HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT HAS CLE ARLY HELD THAT LOSS OF YEARS PRIOR TO INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR COULD NOT BE SET OFF WHILE COMPUTING DEDUCTION UNDE R SECTION 80-IA OF THE ACT. WE ARE, THEREFORE, OF TH E OPINION THAT THERE WAS NO REASON TO INTERFERE WITH THE ORDER OF CIT(APPEALS) IN THIS REGARD. IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE, WE DECIDE THIS ISSUE IN FAVOU R OF THE ASSESSEE AND AGAINST THE REVENUE. 4. SO FAR AS, THE CROSS OBJECTION IS CONCERNED, AT THE TIME OF HEARING, THE LD. AR DID NOT PRESS THE GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE IN THE CROSS OBJECTION. THEREFORE, THE CR OSS-OBJECTION IS DISMISSED AS NOT PRESSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE AND THE CROSS OBJECTION OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON WEDNESDAY, THE 6 TH OF JULY, 2016 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( $ % . & '( ) ( ) * + , ) DUVVURU RL REDDY - ./012304556037- 8 9: /JUDICIAL MEMBER ! 9:;<<5=1>01>?@AB@3 )8 /CHENNAI, C9 /DATED, THE 6 TH JULY, 2016. MPO* - - ITA 875 & CO 75/16 4 9D EFGF /COPY TO: 1. /APPELLANT 2. /RESPONDENT 3. H- /CIT(A) 4. H /CIT 5. FIJ K /DR 6. J(L /GF.