The Income tax Offier,Vapi Ward-4,, Nani Daman v. M/s. Clearline Industries, Nani Daman

ITA 3209/AHD/2009 | 2006-2007
Pronouncement Date: 29-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 320920514 RSA 2009
Bench Ahmedabad
Appeal Number ITA 3209/AHD/2009
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 7 month(s) 29 day(s)
Appellant The Income tax Offier,Vapi Ward-4,, Nani Daman
Respondent M/s. Clearline Industries, Nani Daman
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 29-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 29-07-2011
Assessment Year 2006-2007
Appeal Filed On 30-11-2009
Judgment Text
- 1 - IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AHMEDABAD BENCH A AHMEDABAD BEFORE S/SHRI M. K. SHRAWAT JM AND A. K. GARODIA AM INCOME-TAX OFFICER VAPI WARD-4 DAMAN VS. M/S CLEARLINE INDUSTRIES PLOT NO.1 GALA NO.4 RINGANWADA VAPI-DAMAN ROAD NANI DAMAN. (APPELLANT) .. (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY :- SHRI S. K. MEENA SR.DR RESPONDENT BY:- WRITTEN SUBMISSION (NONE) O R D E R PER M. K. SHRAWAT JUDICIAL MEMBER. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) VALSAD DATED 31.8.2009 RAISING FOLLOWING GROUNDS : - (1) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN L AW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE INITIAL PERIOD ASS T. YEAR 2004- 05 INSTEAD OF ASST. YEAR 2000-01. (2) ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN L AW THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE DEDUCTION U/S 80IB OF THE IT ACT WHICH WAS DISALLOWED IN THE ABSENCE OF AUDIT RE PORT IN FORM NO.10CCB. 2. THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE IS E NGAGED IN THE BUSINESS OF MANUFACTURING OF ICE CUBES. THE UNIT OF THE ASSESSEE IS LOCATED ITA NO.3209/AHD/2009 ASST. YEAR2006-07 ITA NO.3209/AHD/2009 ASST. YEAR 2006-07 2 IN THE UNION TERRITORY OF DAMAN WHICH IS A BACKWARD AREA AS SPECIFIED IN THE VIIITH SCHEDULE TO THE I.T.ACT. THE ASSESSEE FI LED ITS RETURN OF INCOME FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION ON 30.10.2006 DECL ARING TOTAL INCOME OF RS.NIL AND THE ASSESSMENT WAS COMPLETED U/S 144 OF THE ACT ON 03.11.2008 DETERMINING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.10 32 408 /-. AGGRIEVED THE ASSESSEE WENT IN APPEAL BEFORE THE FIRST APPELLATE AUTHORITY. 3. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS GIVEN RELIEF TO THE ASSESSEE OF RS.2 82 858/-. THE LD. CIT(A) DECIDED THE APPEAL IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE WITH THE FOLLOWING OBSERVATIONS :- 6.2 THE LD. AR OF THE APPELLANT SUBMITTED THE COPY OF POWER BILL ALONG WITH COPY OF PERMANENT SSI CERTIFICATE SHOWING THAT THE PRODUCTION DATE FALLS IN ASST. YEAR 2004-05 AND SHOULD BE TAKEN AS INITIAL ASST. YEAR. THE LEARNED APPELLANT ALSO SUBMITTED THAT IN CASE OF MA XWELL INDUSTRIES ANOTHER GROUP COMPANY FOR ASST. YEAR 2005-06 THE LD . AO HAS ALLOWED DEDUCTION U/S 80IB FOLLOWING CIT(A) ORDER DATED 27/ 5/09 VIDE APPEAL EFFECT ORDER DATED 13/7/09 ON IDENTICAL FACTS. EVEN IN ASST. YEAR 2004-05 THE INITIAL ASST. YEAR OF 2004-05 HAS BEEN ALREADY ALLOWED BY THE AO. 6.3 AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION OF THE SUBMISSION M ADE BY THE LD. AR AND THE OBSERVATION MADE BY THE AO I AGREE WITH TH E APPELLANTS STAND. I HELD THAT THE INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR SHOULD BE TAK EN AS ASST. YEAR 2004- 05. THUS THE APPELLANT SUCCEEDS IN THIS GROUND OF APPEAL. 4. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. HOWEVER WRITTEN SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN FILED THROUGH WHICH PRELIMINA RY OBJECTION OF TAX EFFECT IS RAISED AS UNDER :- THE AMOUNT IN DISPUTE VIDE THIS APPEAL IS RS.2 82 858. THE GROUND NO.1 & 2 IS FOR THE SAME DISALLOWANCE OF RS.2 82 858. TH E GROUND NO.1 IS RELATING TO INITIAL ASSESSMENT YEAR RESULTING DISAL LOWANCE OF DEDUCTION U/S ITA NO.3209/AHD/2009 ASST. YEAR 2006-07 3 80IB AS THE RELEVANT ASST. YEAR BEING OUT OF 5 INIT IAL ASSESSMENT YEARS. THE GROUND NO.2 IS RELATING TO DISALLOWANCE U/S 80I B WHICH RESULTS IN THE SAME DISALLOWANCE AS IN GROUND NO.1 BUT ON THE DIFF ERENT ALTERNATIVE GROUND ON THE BASIS OF COMPLIANCE OF CONDITIONS OF SECTION 80IB. BOTH THE GROUNDS TAKEN TOGETHER AMOUNT AGITATED BEFORE HONO URABLE ITAT IS RS.2 82 858/-. THE TAX EFFECT OF ABOVE DISPUTED AMO UNT IS LESS THAN RS.2.00 LAKHS AND HENCE APPEAL IS NOT MAINTAINABLE AS HELD BY JURISDICTIONAL GUJARAT HIGH COURT IN CIT VS. CONCOR D PHARMACEUTICALS 317 ITR 395 (2009). THE ABOVE LIMIT HAS BEEN RAISED TO RS.3.00 LAKHS AN D WHICH IS APPLICABLE TO PENDING APPEAL ALSO AS HELD IN CIT VS. MADHUKAR INAMDAR 318 ITR 149 BOMBAY HC. HENCE THE TAX EFFECT IN THIS CASE IS LESS THAN RS.2 LACS. SO AFTER CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF LD. DR AND GOING THR OUGH THE MATERIALS ON RECORD WE ARE OF THE VIEW THAT THE DEPARTMENT OUGH T NOT HAVE FILED THE APPEAL. OUR VIEW IS SUPPORTED BY THE DECISION OF H ON. DELHI HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. MANGLAM RICINUS LTD. (2008) 174 TAXMAN 186 (DEL). AS THE APPEAL SO FILED IS AGAINST THE EXECUT IVE INSTRUCTIONS WHICH ARE BINDING ON THE DEPARTMENT WE DISMISS THE APPEA L IN LIMINE. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE I S DISMISSED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN OPEN COURT ON 29 TH JULY 2011 SD/- SD/- (A. K. GARODIA) (M. K. SHRAWAT) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER AHMEDABAD DATED : 29/07/2011 MAHATA/- ITA NO.3209/AHD/2009 ASST. YEAR 2006-07 4 COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO :- 1. THE ASSESSEE. 2. THE REVENUE. 3. THE CIT(APPEALS)- 4. THE CIT CONCERNS. 5. THE DR ITAT AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE. BY ORDER DEPUTY / ASSTT.REGISTRAR ITAT AHMEDABAD 1.DATE OF DICTATION 25/7/11. 2.DATE ON WHICH THE TYPED DRAFT IS PLACED BEFORE TH E DICTATING MEMBER 25/7/11. /OTHER MEMBER. 3.DATE ON WHICH THE APPROVED DRAFT COMES TO THE SR. P.S./P.S. 4.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER IS PLACED BEFORE THE DICTATING MEMBER FOR PRONOUNCEMENT.. 5.DATE ON WHICH THE FAIR ORDER COMES BACK TO THE SR .P.S./P.S29.7.11 6.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE BENCH CLERK .. 29.7.11 7.DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE HEAD CLERK . 8.THE DATE ON WHICH THE FILE GOES TO THE ASSTT. REG ISTRAR FOR SIGNATURE ON THE ORDER 9.DATE OF DESPATCH OF THE ORDER..