ACIT, Bangalore v. M/s Pointec Writing Instruments Pvt. Ltd.,, Bangalore

ITA 1143/BANG/2009 | 2003-2004
Pronouncement Date: 31-01-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 114321114 RSA 2009
Bench Bangalore
Appeal Number ITA 1143/BANG/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 1 month(s) 27 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, Bangalore
Respondent M/s Pointec Writing Instruments Pvt. Ltd.,, Bangalore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 31-01-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 31-01-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 27-01-2011
Next Hearing Date 27-01-2011
Assessment Year 2003-2004
Appeal Filed On 03-12-2009
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL BANGALORE BENCH B BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN VICE PRESIDENT AND SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI JUDICIAL MEMBER ITA NOS.1143 & 1144(BANG)/2009 (ASSESSMENT YEARS: 2003-04 & 2004-05) DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX CIRCLE 12(2) BANGALORE. APPELLANT VS. M/S.POINTEC WRITING INSTRUMENTS PVT. LTD. NO.26/A INDUSTRIAL AREA ATTIBELE BANGALORE-562 107. RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI B.ARULAPPA. RESPONDENT BY : NONE. O R D E R PER SMT. P. MADHAVI DEVI JM : THESE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-III BANGALORE DATED 26-2-2009 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 AND 2004-05. 2. IN BOTH THESE APPEALS THE REVENUE IS AGGRIEVED BY THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) HOLDING THAT THE DUE DRAW B ACK RECEIVED BY THE ASSESSEE IS ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT 1961 [HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS 'T HE ACT']. 3.BRIEF FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE FIL ED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ON 1-12-2003 DECLARING AN INCOME OF RS.3 71 270/- AND BOOK PROFIT ITA NOS.1143 & 1144(BANG)/2009 PAGE 2 OF 3 OF RS.22 57 233/-. DURING THE ASSESSMENT PROCEEDIN GS U/S 143(3) THE AO OBSERVED THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS MADE A CLAIM U/S 80-IB TO THE TUNE OF RS.29 42 964/-. BY OBSERV ING THAT THE SAID CLAIM WAS DISALLOWED IN THE EARLIER YEAR HE D ELETED THE SAME FOR THIS YEAR ALSO. 4. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE PREFERRED AN APPEAL BEFO RE THE CIT(A) WHO ALLOWED THE SAME BY FOLLOWING THE DE CISION OF THE ITAT IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EARLIER ASS ESSMENT YEARS WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE ASSESSEE WAS ENT ITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S 80-IB ON THE DUTY DRAW BACK RECEIVED BY IT. AGGRIEVED BY THE SAME THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEF ORE US. 5. SHRI B.ARULAPPA THE LEARNED DEPARTMENTAL REPRESENTATIVE STRONGLY SUPPORTED THE ORDERS OF THE AO. THERE WAS NO REPRESENTATION ON BEHALF OF THE RESPONDENT-A SSESSEE IN SPITE OF SERVICE OF NOTICE ON THE ASSESSEE FOR THE DATE OF HEARING ON 27-1-2011. 6. HAVING CONSIDERED THE MATTER EXPARTE-QUA-THE ASSESSEE WE FIND THAT THE CIT(A) HAS ONLY FOLLOWED THE DECISION OF THIS TRIBUNAL IN THE ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR EAR LIER ASSESSMENT YEARS. BUT THIS ISSUE IS NOW COVERED AGA INST THE ASSESSEE BY THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE SUPREME COU RT OF INDIA IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA 2009-TIOL-100-SC-IT WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT DUTY DRAW BACK AND DEPB BENEFITS DO NOT FORM PART OF THE NET PROFITS OF THE ELIGIBLE INDUSTRIAL UNDERTAKING AND THE PROFITS DERIVED BY WAY OF SUCH INCENTIVES DO NO T FALL WITHIN ITA NOS.1143 & 1144(BANG)/2009 PAGE 3 OF 3 THE EXPRESSION PROFITS DERIVED FROM INDUSTRIAL UND ERTAKING IN SECTION 80-IB. 7. IN THE RESULT THE REVENUES APPEALS ARE ALLOWE D AND THE ORDERS OF THE CIT(A) ARE SET ASIDE AND THE ORDE RS OF THE AO ARE RESTORED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 31 ST JANUARY 2011. SD/- SD/- (DR. O.K. NARAYANAN) VICE PRESIDENT (SMT. P.MADHAVI DEVI) JUDICIAL MEMBER EKS COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A) CONCERNED 4. CIT 5. DR ITAT BANGALORE 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT BANGALORE