The ACIT,Vapi Circle, Nani Daman V. M/s. Mars Packaging Industries, Nani Daman

MA 234/AHD/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2013] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 0412 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 5 month(s) 28 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 21-06-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 07-06-2013
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-12-2012
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: RAHUL KUMAR
• Keywords: Business income
• Section: 80IB

Judgement Text

, , , , A , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AT AHMEDABAD, A BENCH . .. . . .. . , !' !' !' !', , , , #$ #$ #$ #$ # ## #. .. .% $% % $% % $% % $%, , , , &' ( &' ( &' ( &' ( & ' & ' & ' & ' BEFORE S/SHRI G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT AND A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER) MA NO.234/AHD/2012 IN ITA NO.3211/AHD/2009 [ASSTT. YEAR : 2006-2007] ACIT, VAPI CIRCLE VAPI. /VS. M/S.MARS PACKAGING INDUSTRIES SURVEY NO.98/1 DAMAN IND. ESTATE, KADAIYA NANI DAMAN. PAN: AAIFM 3136 H ( (( (*+ *+ *+ *+ / APPELLANT) ( (( (,-*+ ,-*+ ,-*+ ,-*+ / RESPONDENT) ( . / &/ REVENUE BY : SHRI RAHUL KUMAR, SR.DR 12 . / &/ ASSESSEE BY : SHRI TUSHAR HEMANI 3 . 24'/ DATE OF HEARING : 7 TH JUNE, 2013 5%6 . 24'/ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 21.6.2013 &7 / O R D E R PER G.C. GUPTA, VICE-PRESIDENT: THIS MA BY THE REVENUE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2006-2007 IS DIRECTED AGAINST T HE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN REVENUES APPEAL FOR THE RELEVANT ASSES SMENT YEAR 2006-2007 IN ITA NO.3211/AHD/2009 DATED 2-5-2012. MA NO.234/AHD/2012 IN ITA NO.3211/AHD/2009 -2- 2. THE LEARNED DR SUBMITTED THAT THE DEDUCTION HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80IB IN RESPECT OF DISAL LOWANCE MADE UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT, AND IT HAS RESULTED I N DOUBLE DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE FOR THE REASON THAT, IN THE SUCCEEDING YEA R AGAIN THE ASSESSEE WILL GET THE DEDUCTION ON PAYMENT OF TDS AMOUNT, AND HEN CE IT IS A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE SUBMITTED THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, AND THE ISSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE DECISION OF THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD IN MA NO.198/AHD/20 12 DATED 7.12.2012 WHEREIN IN IDENTICAL FACTS, THE ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. WE HAVE CONSIDERED RIVAL SUBMISSION AND HAVE PER USED THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL, AND THE MISC. APPLICATION OF THE REVE NUE AS WELL AS THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED IN MA NO.198/AHD/2012 IN ITO VS. M/S.JALARAM PLAST PACK DATED 7.12.2012. WE FIND TH AT THERE IS NO MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AS THE DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB HAS TO BE COMPUTED ON THE BASIS OF INCREASED ASSESSED INCOME DUE TO CERTAIN DISALLOWANCE MADE IN THE ASSESSMENT. IN THE SUCCEE DING YEAR, WHEN THE ASSESSEE DEPOSITED THE AMOUNT OF TDS, IT WILL GET D EDUCTION UNDER SECTION 40(A)(IA) OF THE ACT IN THAT YEAR, AND THEREFORE TH E BUSINESS INCOME OF THAT YEAR SHALL COME DOWN, AND THE ASSESSEE SHALL BE ELI GIBLE FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB FOR THAT YEAR ON THE REDUCED AMO UNT OF BUSINESS INCOME, AND THEREFORE THERE WOULD NO OCCASION FOR A LLOWING DOUBLE DEDUCTION TO THE ASSESSEE. IN IDENTICAL FACTS, SIM ILAR ISSUE WAS DECIDED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD IN MA NO.198/AHD/2012 IN ITO VS. M/S.JALARAM PLAST PACK D ATED 7.12.2012 (SUPRA), AND WE BEING IN AGREEMENT WITH THE ORDER O F THE TRIBUNAL IN THAT MA NO.234/AHD/2012 IN ITA NO.3211/AHD/2009 -3- CASE, DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE, A ND HOLD THAT THERE IS NO MISTAKE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD IN THE APPELLATE O RDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 4. IN THE RESULT, THE MA OF THE REVENUE STANDS DISM ISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON THE DATE MENTIONE D HEREINABOVE. SD/- SD/- ( #.% $% /A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY) &' ( /ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( . .. . . .. . /G.C. GUPTA) !' !' !' !' /VICE-PRESIDENT C OPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1) : APPELLANT 2) : RESPONDENT 3) : CIT(A) 4) : CIT CONCERNED 5) : DR, ITAT. BY ORDER DR/AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD