Opti Products Pvt Ltd., CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

ITA 894/CHNY/2015

• Counselvise Citation: [2019] 117 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1238 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 4 year(s) 1 month(s) 12 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 04-06-2019
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Partly Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 20-03-2018
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 22-04-2015
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: D ANAND

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH: CHENNAI , ! . , ! & BEFORE SHRI GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI S. JAYARAMAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ./ ITA NO.894/CHNY/2015 /ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2010-11 M/S.OPTI PRODUCTS PVT. LTD., 81B, II MAIN ROAD, AMBATTUR INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, CHENNAI-58. [PAN: AAACO 1099 E] VS. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, COMPANY WARD-V(1), CHENNAI-34. ( ( /APPELLANT) ( )*( /RESPONDENT) ( + / APPELLANT BY : MR.D.ANAND, ADV. )*( + /RESPONDENT BY : MR.AR.V.SREENIVASAN, JCIT + /DATE OF HEARING : 04.06.2019 + /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 04.06.2019 / O R D E R PER GEORGE MATHAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER : THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS)-3, CHENNAI, IN ITA NO.1008/2013- 14 DATED 20.02.2015 FOR THE AY 2010-11. 2. SHRI AR.V.SREENIVASAN, JCIT, REPRESENTED ON BEHA LF OF THE REVENUE AND SHRI D.ANAND, ADV., REPRESENTED ON BEHALF OF TH E ASSESSEE. ITA NO.894/CHNY/2015 :- 2 -: 3. IT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE LD.AR THAT THE ASSESSEE HAD CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.80IA(4)(III) IN RESPECT OF PRINCE TA TIA INFO PARK. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE SAME HAD BEEN DENIED. IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT AS AGAINST THE NON GRANTING OF REGISTRATION REQUIRED U /S.80IA(4)(III), THE ASSESSEE HAD FILED A WRIT PETITION BEFORE THE HONB LE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN WP NO.26672/2011 PRAYING FOR ISSUANCE OF N OTIFICATION FOR RECOGNITION FOR BEING THE DEDUCTION U/S.80IA(4)(III ). IT WAS A SUBMISSION THAT THE SAID WRIT PETITION IS PENDING TILL NOW. I T WAS A SUBMISSION THAT HE HAD NO OBJECTION IF THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE R ESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR RE-ADJUDICATION AFTER DISPOSAL OF THE WRIT P ETITION BY THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. 4. IN REPLY, THE LD.DR DID NOT RAISE ANY SERIOUS OB JECTION. 5. WE HAVE CONSIDERED THE RIVAL SUBMISSIONS. 6. AS IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS FILED WRI T PETITION BEFORE THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT FOR BEING NOTIFIE D BY CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE INDUSTRIAL PARK SCHEME AND A S IT IS NOTICED THAT THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE AGAINST THE DENIAL OF THE BENEFIT OF DEDUCTION U/S.80IA(4)(III), IN THE INTEREST OF NATURAL JUSTIC E, THE ISSUES IN THIS APPEAL ARE RESTORED TO THE FILE OF THE AO TO RE-ADJUDICATE THE ISSUES AFTER THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT I N THE WRIT PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IN WP NO.26672/2011. ITA NO.894/CHNY/2015 :- 3 -: 7. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS PARTLY ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 04 TH DAY OF JUNE, 2019, IN CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- ( . ) ( S. JAYARAMAN ) ! /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( ) (GEORGE MATHAN) ! /JUDICIAL MEMBER /CHENNAI, 2 /DATED: 04 TH JUNE, 2019. TLN + )34 54 /COPY TO: 1. ( /APPELLANT 4. 6 /CIT 2. )*( /RESPONDENT 5. 4 ) /DR 3. 6 ( ) /CIT(A) 6. /GF