M/s. S>P.R. Builders, CHENNAI V. ITO, CHENNAI

MA 165/CHNY/2018

• Counselvise Citation: [2018] 111 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 1459 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 23 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 31-08-2018
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2011-2012
• Appeal Filed On: 08-01-2018
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR
• Assessee Lawyers: S SRIDHAR
• Section: 254(2)

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME-TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH, CHENNAI . , . , BEFORE SHRI ABRAHAM P. GEORGE, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER & SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.P. NOS.165 AND 166/CHNY/2018 [IN I.T.A. NOS.2843 AND 3359/CHNY/2016] ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2011-12 & 2012-13 M/S. SPR BUILDERS, NO.57, NARAYANA MUDALI STREET, SOWCARPET, CHENNAI 600 079. [ PAN: ABEFS7408K] VS. THE INCOME-TAX OFFICER, BUSINESS WARD-XII(3), CHENNAI 600 006. ( /APPELLANT ) ( / RESPONDENT ) / APPELLANT BY : SHRI S. SRIDHAR, ADVOCATE / RESPONDENT BY : SHRI R. CLEMENT RAMESH KUMAR, ADDL. CIT / DATE OF HEARING : 31.08.2018 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 31.08.2018 / O R D E R PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: BOTH THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE AGAINST THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN I.T.A. NOS. 2843 AND 3359/CHNY/2016 DATED 28.07.2017, ITS GRIEVANCE IS THAT WITH REGARD TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 [ACT IN SHORT], THE PROPORTIONATE DEDUCTION WAS ALTERNATIVELY PRESSED BY THE PETITIONER IN THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED ESPECIALLY IN PARA NO. M.P. NOS. 165 & 166/CHNY/2018 2 4.1.1(B2)(VII), 4.1.2(B)(VI), 4.1.3(B)(V) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 [I.T.A. NO. 2843/CHNY/2016] & IN PARA NO. 5.1.2(III) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2012-13 [I.T.A. NO. 3359/CHNY/2016] AND THE SAID ALTERNATE SUBMISSION WAS FORTIFIED WITH THE DECISIONS CITED THEREIN INCLUDING THE DECISIONS OF THE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT. IT WAS THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL THAT THE ALTERNATE SUBMISSIONS OF THE PETITIONER WERE NOT ADJUDICATED IN THE COMMON ORDER PASSED BY THE BENCH ESTABLISHING THE MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD FOR APPROPRIATE DECISION UNDER SECTION 254(2) OF THE ACT AND ACCORDINGLY PRAYED FOR RECALLING THE COMMON ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION. 2. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE LD. DR FAIRLY CONCEDED THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE LD. COUNSEL. 3. WE HAVE HEARD RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND PERUSED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. WE ALSO PERUSED THE COPY OF THE WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS AS WAS FILED DURING THE COURSE OF ORIGINAL APPEAL HEARING, WHEREIN, WITH REGARD TO THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT, AT PARA NO. 4.1.1(B2)(VII), 4.1.2(B)(VI), 4.1.3(B)(V) FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2011-12 AS WELL AS IN PARA 5.1.2(III), THE PETITIONER RAISED SPECIFIC GROUND, WHICH WAS NOT ADJUDICATED BY THE TRIBUNAL AND THE SAME READS AS UNDER: M.P. NOS. 165 & 166/CHNY/2018 3 WITHOUT PREJUDICE TO THE ABOVE ARGUMENTS, WHERE IT IS CONSIDERED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS VIOLATED PROVISIONS OF SECTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT, THEN THE PROPORTIONATE DEDUCTION IN RESPECT OF UNITS FOR WHICH SECTION 80IB(10) CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED SHOULD BE ALLOWED.. 4. ON PERUSAL OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS NOT ADJUDICATED THE ABOVE ALTERNATIVE PLEAS RAISED IN THE FORM OF WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS FILED BY THE PETITIONER. ACCORDINGLY, WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 28.07.2017 FOR LIMITED PURPOSES TO ADJUDICATE THE ABOVE ALTERNATIVE PLEAS RAISED BY THE PETITIONER AND POST THE APPEALS FOR HEARING ON 27.09.2018. NO SEPARATE NOTICE WOULD BE ISSUED SINCE THE DATE OF HEARING WAS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT. 5. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE MPS FILED BY THE ASSESSEE ARE ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 31 ST AUGUST, 2018 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P. GEORGE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (DUVVURU RL REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER CHENNAI, DATED, THE 31.08.2018 VM/- /COPY TO: 1. / APPELLANT, 2. / RESPONDENT, 3. ( ) /CIT(A), 4. /CIT, 5. /DR & 6. /GF.