ACIT, Coimbatore v. M/s. Chettinad Lignite Transport Services Private Limited, Coimbatore

ITA 1312/CHNY/2011 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 18-11-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 131221714 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AABCC7357G
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number ITA 1312/CHNY/2011
Duration Of Justice 4 month(s) 4 day(s)
Appellant ACIT, Coimbatore
Respondent M/s. Chettinad Lignite Transport Services Private Limited, Coimbatore
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 18-11-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted B
Tribunal Order Date 18-11-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 01-11-2011
Next Hearing Date 01-11-2011
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 14-07-2011
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL B BENCH CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI N.S. SAINI ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] I.T.A.NOS.1312 & 1313/MDS/2011 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2007-08 & 2008-09 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX COMPANY CIRCLE I(1) 63 RACE COURSE COIMBATORE 641 018. VS M/S CHETTINAD LIGNITE TRANSPORT SERVICES PRIVATE LIMITED 43 RACE COURSE COIMBATORE 641 018. [PAN - AABCC7357G] (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI R.B. NAIK CIT-DR RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIKRAM VIJAYARAGHAVAN DATE OF HEARING : 01.11.2011 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 18.11.2011 O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE PERTAINING T O ASSESSMENT YEARS 2007-08 AND 2008-09 ARE DIRECTED AGAINST THE COMMO N ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A)-I COIMBATORE DATED 25.4.2011. 2. BRIEFLY STATED THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT T HE ASSESSEE A COMPANY REGISTERED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT 1956 H AS FILED ITS ITA NOS.1312 & 1313/MDS/11 :- 2 -: RETURN OF INCOME ON 30.10.2007 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 DECLARING AN INCOME OF ` 5 98 480/-. THE COMPANY FILED ITS RETURN OF INCOM E FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09 ON 27.9.2008 DECLARING AN I NCOME OF ` 3 76 36 810/-. INITIALLY THE RETURNS OF INCOME W ERE PROCESSED U/S 143(1) AND LATER ON THE SAME WERE SCRUTINIZED AND REGULAR ASSESSMENT S WERE COMPLETED U/S 143(3) R.W.S 147 OF THE ACT ON 24.12.2010. WHILE COMPLETING REGULAR ASSESSMENT S THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAS DISALLOWED ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR DEDUCTI ON MADE U/S 80IA OF THE ACT. M/S ST-CMS ELECTRIC COMPANY PVT. LTD A COMPANY INCORPORATED UNDER THE COMPANIES ACT HAD AGREED TO DESIGN AND CONSTRUCT A 250 MW ELECTRIC POWER GENERATING FACILI TY AT NEYVELI AND OPERATE THE PROJECT FOR THE PURPOSE OF GENERATING A ND SELLING ELECTRICITY TO THE TAMIL NADU ELECTRICITY BOARD (TNEB) UNDER A POWER PURCHASE AGREEMENT DATED 20.11.1996. PURSUANT TO THIS AGREE MENT THE SAID COMPANY HAD ENTERED INTO A FUEL SUPPLY AGREEMENT ON 29.4.1998 WITH NEYVELI LIGNITE CORPORATION(NLC) WHEREBY NLC AGREED TO SUPPLY LIGNITE TO THE SAID COMPANY. IT CALLED FOR BIDS FROM CONTR ACTORS TO CONSTRUCT OWN OPERATE AND MAINTAIN A LIGNITE TRANSPORT SYSTE M. THE COMPANY WAS ENTITLED TO APPOINT A CONTRACTOR FOR TH E AFORESAID PURPOSE IN TERMS OF THE AGREEMENT THEREFORE ASSESSEE WAS DESIGNATED THE CONTRACTOR FOR DOING THE AFORESAID INFRASTRUCTURE W ORK. PURSUANT TO THE ITA NOS.1312 & 1313/MDS/11 :- 3 -: ABOVE CONTRACT THE ASSESSEE LAID ROADS AND INFRAST RUCTURAL FACILITIES AND ALSO DEVELOPED OPERATED AND MAINTAINED RAILWAY SIDINGS AT VADALUR AND UTHANGALMANGALAM RAILWAY STATIONS. THE ASSESSEE HAD ENTERED INTO BACK TO BACK AGREEMENT WITH M/S ST-CMS ELECTRIC CO. PVT. LTD. THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BY THE ASSESSEE WI TH THE ABOVE COMPANY WAS IN LINE WITH THE AGREEMENT ENTERED INTO BETWEEN THE COMPANY AND THE RAILWAYS FOR THE PURPOSE OF LAYING RAILWAY SIDINGS. THE ASSESSEE WAS REQUIRED TO CO-ORDINATE WITH THE R AILWAYS FOR THE INSTALLATION AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE RAILWAY SIDING S COMPLYING WITH ALL RULES AND REGULATIONS. THIS CONTRACT WAS ALSO PUR SUANT TO THE CONTRACT BETWEEN ST-CMS AND THE SOUTHERN RAILWAYS WHEREBY TH E ASSESSEE WAS PERMITTED TO BE EMPLOYED AS A CONTRACTOR. THE ASSESSEE HAD ALSO SET UP A SEWAGE TREATMENT PLANT PURSUANT TO THE OR DER OF THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD DATED 28.6.2002. AFTER GETTING APPR OVAL OF THE POLLUTION CONTROL BOARD THE TNEB VIDE ITS ORDER DATED 17.10 .2001 HAD ACCEPTED THE ASSESSEE AS THE INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDER AND REI TERATED THE SAME VIDE THEIR LETTER DATED 25.9.2006. ACCORDINGLY T HE ASSESSEE HAD SET UP INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITIES AS REQUIRED U/S 80IA. THE ASSESSEE HAS BEEN CLAIMING THIS BENEFIT FOR ALL THE YEARS AND FO R THE SIXTH YEAR OF OPERATION THE ASSESSEE FILED RETURN DECLARING AN I NCOME OF ` 3 76 36 810/- AND CLAIMED BENEFIT OF SECTION 80IA. THE ASSESSING ITA NOS.1312 & 1313/MDS/11 :- 4 -: OFFICER IN HIS ORDER DATED 24.12.2010 HAS REJECTE D THE ASSESSEES CLAIM FOR RELIEF U/S 80IA ON THE GROUND THAT THE AS SESSEE DID NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF SUB-SECTION (4) OF SECTION 80IA AND THAT EXPLANATION (13) APPENDED TO SECTION 80IA IS APPLIC ABLE TO THE ASSESSEES CASE. ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICE R THE ASSESSEE HAD NOT ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CENTRAL OR S TATE GOVERNMENT LOCAL AUTHORITY OR ANY STATUTORY BODY FOR - (I) DEVELOPING OR (II) OPERATING AND MAINTAINING OR (III) DEVELOPING OPERATING AND MAINTAINING A NEW INFRASTRUCTURE FACILITY ACCORDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE HA D ONLY AN AGREEMENT WITH ST-CMS ELECTRIC COMPANY PVT. LTD. S O IT DID NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENTS OF SECTION 80IA. BUT THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED THIS CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BY FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE ITAT CHENNAI BENCH RENDERED IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 AND THE FACTS OF THAT YEAR REMAINED EXACTLY IDENTICAL TO THE FACTS OF THIS YEAR. THE TRIBUNAL ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEARS 2005-06 AND 2006-07 ALSO. 3. IT WAS POINTED OUT BY THE LD.AR AT THE VER Y OUTSET OF HEARING OF THE APPEALS THAT THE ISSUE IN QUESTION STANDS SQUAR ELY COVERED BY THE ITA NOS.1312 & 1313/MDS/11 :- 5 -: ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE. THE TRIBUNAL HAS REVERSED THE FINDING OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHIL E PASSING ITS ORDER IN I.T.A.NO. 2287/MDS/2006 ORDER DATED 27.7.2007 IN A SSESSEES OWN CASE FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05. THE GROUNDS OF APPEALS RAISED BEFORE US IN THESE TWO ASSESSMENT YEARS ARE EXACTLY SAME WHICH WERE RAISED IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2004-05 AND THE SAME HAVE BEEN APTLY DEALT WITH BY THE TRIBUNAL. THEREFORE WE CANNOT ALLOW T HESE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE. 4. IN THE RESULT THE APPEALS OF THE REVENUE STAND DISMISSED. THE ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT O N 18.11.2011. SD/- SD/- (N.S. SAINI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( HARI OM MARATHA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 18 TH NOVEMBER 2011 RD COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT(A)-I COIMBATORE 4. CIT-I COIMBATORE 5. DR