M/s. Ramco Industries Ltd., CHENNAI v. ACIT, Virudhunagar

MA 181/CHNY/2010 | 1998-1999
Pronouncement Date: 11-03-2011 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 18121724 RSA 2010
Bench Chennai
Appeal Number MA 181/CHNY/2010
Duration Of Justice 3 month(s) 20 day(s)
Appellant M/s. Ramco Industries Ltd., CHENNAI
Respondent ACIT, Virudhunagar
Appeal Type Miscellaneous Application
Pronouncement Date 11-03-2011
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted D
Tribunal Order Date 11-03-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 11-03-2011
Next Hearing Date 11-03-2011
Assessment Year 1998-1999
Appeal Filed On 21-11-2010
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL CHENNAI BENCH D : CHENNAI [BEFORE SHRI HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI ABRAHAM P GEORGE ACCOUNTANT MEMBER] M.P.NOS.180&181/MDS/2010 [ARISING OUT OF I .T.A NOS.2901/MDS/2004 & 1942/MDS /2006 ] ASSESSMENT YEARS : 1999-2000 & 1998-99 M/S RAMCO INDUSTRIES LTD AURAS CORPORATE CENTRE 4 TH FLOOR #98-A DR.RADHAKRISHNAN ROAD MYLAPORE CHENNAI 600 004 VS THE ACIT CIRCLE I VIRUDHUNAGAR (PETITIONER) (RESPONDENT) PETITIONER BY : SHRI V.JAGADISAN RESPONDENT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB O R D E R PER HARI OM MARATHA JUDICIAL MEMBER: THESE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ARE DIRE CTED IN RELATION TO TRIBUNAL ORDER DATED 27.1.2009 PASSED FOR ASSESSMEN T YEARS 1998-99 AND 1999-2000. THE CASE OF THE PETITIONER IS THAT WHILE HEARING THE APPEALS IN I.T.A.NO.1942/MDS/2006 AND 2901/MDS/2004 ALTERNATE/ ADDITIONAL GROUNDS RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE WERE NOT CONSIDERED AT ALL BY THE TRIBUNAL. THE RECORDS OF THE PETITIONER WER E TRACED AND FOUND THAT THE PETITIONER HAS RAISED ALTERNATE/ADDITIONAL GROUNDS WHICH ARE ALSO FOUND PLACED IN THE FILE FOLDERS BUT INADVERTE NTLY THE SAME REMAINED UNADJUDICATED. THE COMMON ALTERNATE/ADDITI ONAL GROUNDS M.P 180&181/10 :- 2 -: RAISED FOR ASSESSMENT YEARS 1998-99 AND 1999-2000 ARE EXTRACTED HEREIN BELOW: 1. THE DEPARTMENT HAS FILED THE ABOVE APPEAL IN RESPEC T OF ALLOWANCE OF WEIGHTED DEDUCTION IN TERMS OF THE PRO VISIONS OF SECTION 35 (2AB). 2. THE OBJECTION IS RAISED BY THE DEPARTMENT FOR THE F IRST TIME IN THIS APPEAL THAT NOTIFICATION REFER.RED TO IN SECTI ON 35 (2AB) WAS ISSUED ON 8.2.2000 BEYOND THE END OF THE RELEVANT PREVIOUS YEAR AND HENCE THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR WEI GHTED DEDUCTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 35 (2AB). 3. THE ASSESSEE HAS SUBMITTED BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THAT THE OBJECTIONS RAISED IN THE REMAND REPORT BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS NOT VALID AND B ASED ON THAT REPRESENTATION THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPE ALS) HAD ALLOWED THE CLAIM UNDER SECTION 35 (2AB) AND BASED ON CERTIFICATE ISSUED BY DSIR. 4. A PERUSAL OF THE CERTIFICATE ISSUED IN FORM NO.3CM BY THE DSIR DATED 8.3.2000 (COPY ENCLOSED) SHOWS THAT THE DSIR WAS AWARE OF THE NATURE OF BUSINESS OF THE ASSESSEE BY STATIN G THAT THE R&D WAS RELATED TO COMPUTER (DEVELOPING GENERIC SOF TWARE SOLUTIONS) - ERP. 5. ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL/ALTERNATE GROUND OF APP EAL IS PLACED BEFORE THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL FOR THE PURPOSE OF ENABLING THE ASSESSEE COMPANY TO MAKE ALTERNATE CLAIM IN CAS E THE HON' BLE TRIBUNAL IS TO TAKE A VIEW THAT THE WEIGHTED DE DUCTION IS NOT TO BE ALLOWED HAVING REGARD TO THE OBJECTIONS TAKEN BY THE DEPARTMENT IN THIS APPEAL - THE ALTERNATE GROUND NO W RAISED IS VALID SINCE ALL THE FACTS ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORD F OR CONSIDERATION OF THE ALTERNATE CLAIM FOR ALLOWANCE UNDER SECTION 35(1) BOTH IN RESPECT OF REVENUE EXPENDITURE AND CAPITAL EXPENDIT URE. 6. THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IS ENTITLED TO CONSIDER THE AL TERNATE / ADDITIONAL GROUND OF APPEAL BASED ON DECISIONS OF C OURTS OF LAW. M.P 180&181/10 :- 3 -: 7. ACCORDINGLY LEAVE OF THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL IS SOUGHT TO RAISE THE FOLLOWING AS ADDITIONAL OR ALTERNATE GROUNDS OF APP EAL. 'THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO CLAIM THE AMOUNT OF REVENUE EXPENDITURE AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURE RELATED TO R&D IN RESPECT OF WHICH THE CLAIM WAS MADE UNDER SECTION 35 (2AB) AS ALSO AS A DEDUCTION IN TERMS OF SECTION 35 (1) TOWARDS REVENUE AND CAPITAL EXPENDITURE IN CASE THE CLAIM UNDER SECTION 35 (2AB ) IS NOT CONSIDERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE IN THE APPEAL FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT'. 8. AS THE ISSUE INVOLVED IS A LEGAL ISSUE AND THE FACT S ARE AVAILABLE ON RECORD THE HON'BLE TRIBUNAL MAY BE PLEASED TO C ONSIDER THIS PETITION FOR RAISING ADDITIONAL GROUNDS OF APPEAL/A LTERNATE GROUNDS OF APPEAL WHILE DISPOSING OF THE APPEAL. 2. WE NOTICE THAT THE LD.AR WAS ALLOWED TO INSPECT THE RECORDS AND BRING FORTH THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS RAISED. THE ASS ESSEE HAS RAISED ALTERNATE/ADDITIONAL GROUNDS FOR BOTH THE ASSESSMEN T YEARS AND THE SAME REMAINED UNDECIDED. THERE IS NO DISPUTE REGAR DING THIS FACT. CONSEQUENTLY AFTER HEARING BOTH SIDES AND TREADING THROUGH THE RECORDS WE FIND THAT THE ALTERNATIVE/ADDITIONAL GR OUNDS REMAINED UNDECIDED AND NON-ADJUDICATION OF GROUNDS RAISED IN THE APPEALS DEFINITELY AMOUNTS TO A MISTAKE APPARENT FROM RECOR D. WE THEREFORE RECALL THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL DATED 27.1.2009 FO R THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF DECIDING THE ADDITIONAL GROUNDS. THE REGISTRY I S DIRECTED TO FIX THE APPEALS FOR THE LIMITED PURPOSE OF DECIDING THE ALT ERNATIVE/ADDITIONAL GROUNDS IN DUE COURSE. M.P 180&181/10 :- 4 -: 3. IN THE RESULT THE MISCELLANEOUS PETITIONS ST AND ALLOWED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11.3.2011. SD/- SD/- (ABRAHAM P GEORGE) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ( HARI OM MARATHA ) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 11 TH MARCH 2011 RD COPY TO: PETITIONER/RESPONDENT/CIT(A)/CIT/DR