The ITO,Vapi Ward-3, Vapi V. Smt. Rasilaben Natverlal Chauhan, SILVASSA

MA 413/AHD/2009

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 123 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 4673 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 6 month(s) 9 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 11-06-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: D
• Assessment Year: 2002-2003
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2009
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: S N L AGARWAL
• Assessee Lawyers: K MADHUSUDAN SRDR
• Section: 80IB; 2

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCHES D, AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/ SHRI MAHAVIR SINGH , JUDICIAL MEMBER, & SH RI D.C.AGARWAL , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER M.A.NO. 413 /AHD/200 9 (ARISING OUT ITA NO.960/AHD/2006 ASSESSMENT YEAR: 2002-03 DATE OF HEARING: 11.6.10 DRAFTED: 11.6.10 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3, VAPI VS. SMT. RASILABEN NATVERSINH CHAUHAN, PROP. SHEETAL BAR & RESTAURANT AND PROP. M/S. MARUTI SONE WORKS, NOROLI, SILVASSA PAN NO.ABZPC8545Q (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) (ORIGINAL RESPONDENT) (ORIGINAL APPELLANT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI S.N.L. AGARWAL, AR RESPONDENT BY: SHRI K. MADHUSUDAN, SR-DR ORDER PER MAHAVIR SINGH, J.M. BY WAY OF THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION (MA), THE REVENUE HAS REQUESTED FOR RECTIFYING THE MISTAKE AND RECALLING OF TRIBUNALS ORDER IN ITA NO.960/AHD/2006 DATED 03-07-2009 FOR THE REASONS THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS RELIED ON IN THE CASE OF M/S. SHAKTI CORPORATION AND ORS. IN ITA NO.1503/AHD/2008, WHEREIN, THE ISSUE WAS REGARDING DEDUCTION UNDER SE CTION 80IB(10) OF THE ACT FOR DEVELOPING AND BUILDING HOUSING PROJECTS, WHEREAS, IN THE PRESENT CASE THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION IS UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE ACT FOR I NDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING SITUATED IN THE BACKWARD AREA OF SILVASA. 2. AT THE OUTSET THE LD. SR. DR SHRI. K. MADHUSUDAN STATED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS COMMITTED A MISTAKE IN RELYING UPON THE ORDER I N ITA NO.1503/AHD/2008 IN THE CASE OF M/S. SHAKTI CORPORATION AND ORS. HE ST ATED THAT THE ENTIRE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IS REPRODUCTION OF M/S. SHAKTI CORPORA TION AND ORS. (SUPRA) AND EVEN THE DISCUSSION CARRIED OUT IN PARA 3 IS REGARDING T HE REFERENCE OF M/S. SHAKTI CORPORATION AND ORS. (SUPRA) AND NOT FOR THE ISSUE INVOLVED UNDER SECTION 80IB 2 OF THE ACT REGARDING DEDUCTION OF INCOME FOR INDUST RIAL UNDERTAKING SITUATED IN THE BACKWARD AREA. ACCORDINGLY, HE STATED THAT THE ENT IRE ORDER IS ON MISTAKEN NOTION AND THE TRIBUNAL HAS COMMITTED A MISTAKE APPARENT F ROM RECORD, WHICH REQUIRES RECTIFICATION. ACCORDINGLY, HE STATED THAT THIS OR DER BE RECALLED AND IT SHOULD BE REFIXED FOR HEARING. 3. ON THE OTHER HAND THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE AS SESSEE SHRI S.N.L. AGARWAL STATED THAT NO DOUBT THE TRIBUNAL HAS RELIE D ON M/S. SHAKTI CORPORATION AND ORS. (SUPRA), BUT THE REAL ISSUE IS COVERED BY THE TWO DECISIONS OF THE TRIBUNAL REFERRED AT THE TIME OF HEARING. 4. WE HAVE HEARD THE RIVAL CONTENTIONS AND GONE THR OUGH THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE. WE FIND THAT THE TRIBUN AL HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF M/S. SHAKTI CORPORATION AND ORS. (SUPRA), IN WHI CH THE ISSUE WAS REGARDING DEDUCTION FOR DEVELOPING AND BUILDING HOUSING PROJE CTS, WHEREAS, IN THE PRESENT CASE OF THE ASSESSEE THE ISSUE WAS REGARDING CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE ACT FOR INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING SITUATED IN BACKWARD AREA. WE FIND THAT THERE IS A CLEAR CUT MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECORD A ND WE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL AND DIRECT THE REGISTRY TO FIX THE APPEAL IN REGULAR COURSE. 5. IN THE RESULT, REVENUES MA IS ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11/06/2010. SD/- SD/- ( D.C.AGARWAL ) ( MAHAVIR SINGH ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER PLACE: AHMEDABAD. DATE : 11/06/2010 ANKIT* COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A)-XXI, AHMEDABAD 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE (IN DUPLICATE) BY ORDER, DR / AR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD