Manatec Electronics Pvt. Ltd., Pondicherry V. ACIT, Pondicherry

MA 40/CHNY/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4456 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 01-07-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Next Hearing Date: 01-07-2016
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 28-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: A V SREEKANTH
• Assessee Lawyers: JHARNA B HARILAL
• Keywords: Rectification of order

Judgement Text

, , IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL , D B ENCH, CHENNAI . . . , . , & BEFORE SHRI N.R.S.GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER MISCELLANEOUS PETITION NO. 40/MDS/2016 ( ./ IN I.T.A.NO.57/MDS/2014 ( / ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11 ) M/S.MANATEC ELECTRONICS PVT. LTD., C-22 & 23, INDUSTRIAL ESTATE, THATTANCHAVADY, PONDICHERRY 605 009. VS ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE I, PONDICHERRY. PAN:AAFCM 1685D (PETITIONER) ( /RESPONDENT) APPLICANT BY : MS. JHARNA B.HARILAL, FCA /RESPONDENT BY : MR. A.V.SREEKANTH, JCIT /DATE OF HEARING : 1 ST JULY, 2016 /DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 1 ST JULY, 2016 / O R D E R PER A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, AM: THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION IS FILED BY THE ASSESSE E PRAYING FOR RECTIFICATION OF MISTAKE BY RECALLING T HE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL PASSED IN ITA NO.57/MDS/2014 DATED 20.11 .2015. 2. BEFORE US, THE LEARNED AUTHORIZED REPRESENTATIVE SUBMITTED THAT IN THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE TRIB UNAL VIDE ORDER DATED 20.11.2015 HAD DISALLOWED THE BENEFIT OF SECTION 80IB(4) OF THE ACT WITH RESPECT TO FREIGHT INCOME ( DELIVERY CHARGES) OF RS.27,66,294/- BY STATING THAT IT WAS NOT DERIVED 2 MP NO.40/MDS/2016 FROM THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE BY RELYING IN THE CASE OF PANDIAN CHEMICALS VS. CIT REPORTED IN 2 62 ITR 278 (SC), STERLING FOODS VS. CIT REPORTED IN 237 IT R 53(SC) AND CAMBE ELECTRICALS SUPPLY VS. CIT REPORTED IN 11 3 ITR 80(SC) . HOWEVER, ON THE IDENTICAL ISSUE THE TRIBUN AL IN THE CASE OF DCIT VS SICGIL INDIA LTD. IN ITA NO.1174/M DS/2015 HAS DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. IT WAS THEREFORE SUBMITTED THAT BY DENYING THE BENEFIT TO THE ASSESSEE UNDER SECTION 80IB(4) OF THE ACT WITH RESP ECT TO INCOME DERIVED FROM FREIGHT, THE TRIBUNAL HAS COMMI TTED A MISTAKE THAT IS APPARENT ON RECORD WHICH IS REQUIRE D TO BE RECTIFIED. 3. THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARGUED IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNA L AND PLEADED FOR DISMISSING THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION F ILED BY THE ASSESSEE. 4. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE PARTIES AND CAREFULLY PER USED THE MATERIALS AVAILABLE ON RECORD. IN THE CASE CITE D BY THE ASSESSEE DCIT VS SICGIL INDIA LTD. (SUPRA), THE IS SUE WAS 3 MP NO.40/MDS/2016 HELD BY THE TRIBUNAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BECA USE THE TRANSPORTATION OF RAW MATERIALS AND DELIVERY CHARGE S OF FINISHED PRODUCTS WHICH IS LIQUID CARBON DIOXIDE IS AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE AS WELL AS THE TURNOVER OF THE ASSESSEE. PROCUREMENT OF RAW MA TERIALS IS DIRECT MANUFACTURING COST WHICH HAS TO BE TAKEN INT O ACCOUNT FOR THE PURPOSE OF ARRIVING AT THE PROFIT AND GAIN S DERIVED FROM THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY OF THE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING. WHILE AS THE DELIVERY CHARGES OF LIQUID CARBON DIOX IDE WAS DIRECTLY ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE TURNOVER IN THE CASE O F THAT ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE EXCISE DUTY WAS ALSO CHARGED O N THE TRANSPORTATION CHARGES AND THAT ACTIVITY OF THE ASS ESSEE WAS INSEPARABLE FROM THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS OF THE ASSES SEE. HOWEVER, IN THE CASE OF THE RELEVANT ASSESSEE BEFOR E US, THE DELIVERY CHARGE IS A SEPARATE ACTIVITY AND NOT RELA TED TO THE MANUFACTURING ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE. THEREFORE, THE FACTS IN BOTH THE CASES ARE DISTINGUISHABLE AND ACCORDINGLY THE TRIBUNAL IN ITS WISDOM HAS RENDERED THE DECISION RE LYING ON THE DECISIONS OF THE HONBLE APEX COURT. THEREFORE, WE DO NOT FIND ANY MISTAKE IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL I N THE CASE OF THE ASSESSEE. 4 MP NO.40/MDS/2016 5. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITION FILED BY THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THE 1 ST JULY, 2016 SD/- SD/- ( . . . ) ( . ) (N.R.S.GANESAN) ( A.MOHAN A LANKAMONY ) # % / JUDICIAL MEMBER % / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER # /CHENNAI, ( /DATED THE 1 ST JULY, 2016 SOMU *+ ,+ /COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. - () /CIT(A) 4. - /CIT 5. + 1 /DR 6. /GF .