Soft Link International Pvt Ltd., Pune V. ACIT, Pune

MA 82/PUN/2012

• Counselvise Citation: [2015] 124 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 3339 (ITAT-PUNE)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 year(s) 11 month(s) 1 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Miscellaneous Application
• Pronouncement Date: 26-06-2015
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 26-06-2015
• Assessment Year: misc
• Appeal Filed On: 25-07-2012
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: SUNIL PATHAK

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL PUNE BENCH A, PUNE BEFORE SHRI R.K. PANDA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIKAS AWASTHY, JUDICIAL MEMBER M.A. NO.82/PN/2012 (ARISING OUT OF ITA NOS.417 TO 419/PN/2008, ITA NOS. 955 & 956/PN/2008 & CO NOS. 77 TO 81/PN/2011) (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 TO 2003-04 & 2005-06) M/S. SOFT LINK INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD., 2, ANAND PARK, AUNDH, PUNE -411 007 PAN NO.AAACI5704J .. APPLICANT VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-6, PUNE .. RESPONDENT APPLICANT BY : SHRI SUNIL PATHAK & SHRI NIKHIL PATHAK DEPARTMENT BY : SHRI RAJESH DAMOR DATE OF HEARING : 26-06-2015 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 26-06-2015 ORDER PER R.K. PANDA, AM : THE REVENUE THROUGH THIS MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION REQUESTS THE TRIBUNAL TO RECTIFY CERTAIN ERRORS THAT HA S CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL. 2. THE LD. DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE REFERRING TO THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION SUBMITTED THAT THE A.Y. 2004-05 WAS NOT THERE BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. HOWEVER, THE TRIBUNAL IN THE C AUSE TITLE HAS MENTIONED A.YRS. 2000-01 TO 2005-06, THEREFORE, THE S AME SHOULD BE CORRECTED TO A.YRS. 2000-01 TO 2003-04 & A.Y. 2005-06. REFERRING TO PAGE 23 OF THE ORDER HE SUBMITTED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS INADVERTENTLY OMITTED TO MENTION A.Y. 2005-06. HE FUR THER SUBMITTED THAT THE ORDER WAS PRONOUNCED ON 14-02-201 2, HOWEVER, INADVERTENTLY THE SAME HAS BEEN MENTIONED ON THE FRON T PAGE OF 2 THE ORDER AS 14-02-2011. HE ACCORDINGLY SUBMITTED THA T THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BE RECTIFIED TO THIS EXTENT. 3. THE LD. COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE ON THE OTHER HAND AGREED THAT THE TRIBUNAL HAS INADVERTENTLY NOT EXCLUDED A.Y. 20 05-06 IN THE CAUSE TITLE WHICH WAS NOT BEFORE THE TRIBUNAL. SIMILARL Y, IN PAGE 23 OF THE ORDER THE TRIBUNAL HAS INADVERTENTLY OMIT TED A.Y. 2005-06. HE SUBMITTED THAT THE DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE ORDER WAS 14-02-2012, HOWEVER, THE SAME IS MENTIONED A S 14-02- 2011 IN THE FRONT PAGE OF THE ORDER. THEREFORE, THE MISTA KES WHICH ARE APPARENT FROM THE RECORD SHOULD BE RECTIFIED. 4. AFTER HEARING BOTH THE SIDES, WE FIND CERTAIN ERRORS HA VE CREPT IN THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL WHICH NEEDS RECTIFICATION . WE THEREFORE DIRECT THAT THE CAUSE TITLE IN PAGE 1 OF THE OR DER OF THE TRIBUNAL BE READ AS UNDER : ITA NOS.417 TO 419 & ITA NOS. 955 TO 956/PN/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 TO 2003-04 & 2005-06) M/S. SOFT LINK INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD., 2, ANAND PARK, AUNDH, PUNE -411 007 PAN NO.AAACI5704J .. APPLICANT VS. ACIT, CIRCLE-6, PUNE .. RESPONDENT C.O. NOS. 77 TO 81/PN/2011 (ARISING FROM ITA NOS.417 TO 419 & ITA NOS. 955 TO 956/PN/2008 (ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2000-01 TO 2003-04 & 2005-06) ACIT, CIRCLE-6, PUNE .. CROSS OBJECTOR VS. M/S. SOFT LINK INTERNATIONAL PVT. LTD., 2, ANAND PARK, AUNDH, PUNE -411 007 PAN NO.AAACI5704J .. RESPONDENT 3 5. SIMILARLY, IN PAGE 23 OF THE ORDER, THE ASSESSMENT YEA R 2005-06 WAS INADVERTENTLY OMITTED WHILE ALLOWING THE APPEA LS FOR A.Y. 2001-02 TO 2003-04 & 2005-06. WE THEREFORE DIRECT THAT LAST 10 LINES OF PAGE 23 (PARA 42) OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL BE READ AS UNDER : 42............... ..................... IN VIEW OF THE ABOVE FINDINGS ON THE OBJECTIONS RAISE D BY THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE HOLD THAT THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WERE NOT JUSTIFIED IN DENYING THE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.10A T O THE ASSESSEE IN THE A.YRS. 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04 & 2005-06. WE THUS WHILE SETTING ASIDE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW ON THE ISSU E, DIRECT THE A.O. TO ALLOW THE CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S.10A OF THE A CT ON THE ELIGIBLE STPI UNIT. SO FAR AS CLAIM RAISED IN A.Y. 2000-01 IS CONCERNED, AS WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED ABOVE THAT THE STPI UNIT HAS NOT STARTED PRODUCTION IN THE YEAR, HENCE IT IS HELD THAT IT WA S NOT ENTITLED TO THE DEDUCTION FOR A.Y. 2000-01. WE THUS UPHOLD THE ACTI ON OF THE A.O. DURING THE ASST. YEAR 2000-01 IN DENYING THE CLAIMED DEDUCTION. THE COMMON ISSUE NO.2 IN ALL THE APPEALS IS ACCORDINGLY DEC IDED. 6. FURTHER, THE DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT OF THE ORDER BE READ AS 14-02-2012. THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVEN UE IS ACCORDINGLY ALLOWED. 7. IN THE RESULT, THE MISCELLANEOUS APPLICATION FILED BY THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF HEARING IT SELF, I.E. ON 26-06-2015. SD/- SD/- (VIKAS AWASTHY) (R.K. PANDA) JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER SATISH PUNE DATED: 26 TH JUNE, 2015 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO : 1. ASSESSEE 2. DEPARTMENT 3. CIT(A)-II, PUNE 4. CIT-II, PUNE 5. THE D.R, A PUNE BENCH 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER // TRUE COPY // SENIOR PRIVATE SECRETARY ITAT, PUNE BENCHES, P UNE