Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 0, Cited by 2]

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chandigarh

M/S Smart Enterprises, Parwanoo vs Dcit, Parwanoo on 31 August, 2017

       IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
            DIVISION BENCH, CHANDIGARH
        BEFORE SHRI SANJAY GARG, JUDICIAL MEMBER
     AND MS. ANNAPURNA GUPTA, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER

                           ITA No.495/Chd/2017
                        (Assessment Year : 2014-15)

M/s Smart Enterprises,                          Vs.              The D.C.I.T.,
Khasra No.186-187,                                               Circle Parwanoo,
Opp. Terminal Market,                                            H.P.
Sector-6, Parwanoo, H.P.
P A N : AB JFS5729C
(Appellant)                                                      (Respondent)

        Appellant by                    : Shri Manoj Kumar, CA
        Respondent by                   : Smt.Chander Kanta, Sr.DR
        Date of hearing       :                          09.08.2017
        Date of Pronouncement :                          31.08.2017

                                       O R D E R
PER ANNAPURNA GUPTA, A.M.:

Th i s a p p e a l h a s b e e n f i l e d b y th e a s s e s s e e a g ai n st t h e o r d e r p as s e d by t h e L d. CI T( A p pe a l s ) , Sh i m l a , H. P . d a t ed 1 8 . 1 . 2 0 1 7 r e l a ti n g t o a s se s s m e nt y e a r 2 0 14 - 1 5 .

2. I n t he p r e s e n t Ap p e a l t h e a s s e sse e h a s c h a l l e n ged t h e r e s t r i c ti o n o f d ed u c t i o n c l a i me d u / s 8 0 I C o f t h e I n c o m e Ta x A c t , 1 9 6 1 ( i n s ho r t ' t h e A ct ' ) @ 1 0 0 % o f t h e el i gi b l e p r o f i t s to 25%. Th e a s s e s s e e as a c on s e q u e n c e h a s r a i s e d t he f o l l o w i ng g r o u nds o f a p p ea l :

"1. The Id. CIT(A) is wrong in disallowing the benefit of substantial expansion u/s 80IC(2) and confirming the deduction u/s SOIC only to the extent of 25% as against 100% by holding that benefit of substantial expansion is allowable only to the undertaking which were existing as on 07.01.2003.
2. In view of above & such other grounds, which may be taken at the time of hearing, the appeal may please be allowed & justice rendered."
2

3. B r i e f f a c t s r el e va n t t o t h e c a s e a r e t h a t t h e a s se s s e e firm is e ng a g e d in m a n u f ac t u ri n g of w a te r ge y s e r and e l e c t r i c i r o n a nd h a d e - f i l e d h i s r e t u r n d e cl a r i n g i n c o m e o f R s . 2 1 , 0 0 0/ - on 2 2 . 9 . 2 0 14 a f t er claiming d e du c t i o n u /s 8 0 I C o f t h e Ac t, a m o u n t i ng t o R s . 2 , 6 6 , 84 , 6 9 4 /-. I n th e p r e s e n t c a s e , t he a s s e ss e e ha d s t a r t e d i t s m a nu f a c t u r i ng a c t i v i t y /o p e r a ti on o n 5. 7 . 2 0 07 a n d t h e i n i ti a l a s s e s s m e nt year for claim of deduction u/ s 80IC of the Act, was a s s e s s m e nt y e a r 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 . Th e A s s e s s i ng O f f i ce r n o t i c ed t h a t t h e a s s e ss ee h a d a l r e a d y c l a i m e d d e d u ct i o n u / s 8 0 I C o f t h e A c t to t he e x t e n t o f 1 0 0% o f t h e e l i g i b l e p r o f i t s f or f i v e y e ar s p e ri o d s t a r t i ng f r o m as s e s s m e n t y e a r 2 0 0 8 - 0 9 to 2 0 1 2 - 1 3 a n d a ga i n c l a i m e d 100 % d e d u c t i on a g a i n s t t he e l i g i b l e p ro f i t s i n t h e r e l e v a n t a s s e s s m e n t y ea r 2 0 1 4 - 15 w h i c h w a s 7 t h y ea r o f p r o du c t i o n f o r t h e fi r m b y cl a i m i n g to h a v e c a r r i ed o ut s u b s t a n t i a l e xp a n s i o n i n f i n an c i a l y e a r 2011-12 r el e v an t to a s s e ss me n t year 2 01 2- 1 3 . Th e assessee c l a i med that the ye ar under c o n s i de r a t i o n be t r e a t e d as t h e 3 r d y e ar f o r el i g i b i l i t y o f de d u c t i o n u / s 8 0I C o f t h e A c t a n d no t a s t h e 7 t h y e ar o f c l a i m o f d e du c t i o n u / s 8 0 I C o f t h e A c t. Th e A s s e s s i ng O f f i c e r f o r t he d e t a i l e d r e a s o n s m e n t i o ne d i n t h e a s s e s sm e n t o r d e r , h e l d t h a t t h e a s s e s s e e wa s e l i g i b l e f o r de d u c t i o n u / s 8 0I C of th e A c t o n l y @ 2 5 % a s a g a i n st t h e c l a i m o f 1 00 % m a d e by t h e a s s e s s e e .

4. A g g r i e v e d b y t he s a m e , t h e a s se s s e e w e n t i n ap p e a l b e f o r e t h e L d. CI T( A p p e a l s ) w h o u p h e l d t h e o rd e r o f t h e Assessing O f f i ce r following t he decision of the I TA T 3 C h a n d i g a rh B e nc h i n t he c a s e o f M / s H y c r o n E l e c t r o n i c s V s . I TO i n I TA N o . 7 9 8 / C hd / 2 0 12 a n d o t h e r r e l at e d c a s e s. I t i s a g a i n s t t hi s o r d e r o f t h e L d . C I T( A p p e al s ) t h a t t h e a s s e s s e e h a s f i l ed t h e p r es e n t app e a l b e f or e u s .

5. D u r i n g t h e co u r se o f he a r i n g b e f or e u s t h e Ld . c ou n s el f o r a s s e s s e e f ai r l y c o n c e d e d t ha t t h e i s s u e w as c o v e r e d a g a i n s t i t b y t h e d e c i s i o n of t h e I TA T C h a n d i g a r h B e n c h i n t h e c a s e o f M / s H y c r o n E l e c t ro n i c s ( s u p r a) .

6. Th e Ld. DR relied upon the order of the L d . CI T( A p p e a l s ) .

7. W e h a v e h e ar d th e c o n te n t i o ns of b o t h t h e p a r ti es . We see no reason to interfere in the order of the L d . CI T( A p p e a l s ) r e s t r i c ti n g t h e de d u c t i o n c l a i m e d u / s 8 0I C o f t h e A c t , t o th e e x t e n t o f 2 5% o f t h e e l i g i b l e p r o f i t s as a g a i n s t 1 0 0 % c l a i m e d by t h e as s e s s e e . Th e un d i s p u t e d f a c t s i n t h e p r e se n t c a s e b e i n g th a t t h e i n i t i al as s e s s m e n t y e a r f o r t h e p u rp o s e o f c l a i m i n g d e d u c t i o n u / s 8 0 I C o f t h e A c t w a s a ss e s sm e n t y e a r 2 0 0 8- 0 9 a n d t he a ss e s s e e h ad a l r e a d y c l a i m e d d e d u c t i o n o f 1 00 % o f i t s p ro f i t s u n d e r t he s a i d s e ct i o n f o r f i v e y e ar s p er i o d s t a r t i ng f r om as s e s s m e n t y e a r 2 0 0 8- 0 9 to a s s e s s me n t y ear 2 0 1 2 - 1 3. I t i s a l s o no t disputed that in f i n a nc i a l yea r 2 0 1 1 - 12 relevant to a s s e s s m e nt year 2012-13 the assessee had ca r r i e d out s u b s t a n t i a l e x p an s i o n o n a c c o unt o f w h i c h i t h ad c l a i m e d 1 0 0 % d e d u ct i o n o f i t s p r of i t s i n t h e i m p u g ne d as s e s s m e n t y e a r w h i c h i s 7 t h y e a r o f p r od u ct i o n b y t h e as s es s e e f i r m . W e h a v e a l s o g on e t h r o ug h t h e o r d e r o f t h e I . T. A . T. i n t h e 4 c a s e o f M /s H yc r o n E l e c t r o ni c s ( s u p r a ) an d f i nd t h a t t h e I . T. A . T. i n th e sa i d c a s e h a d e xh a u s t i v e l y i n t e rp r e t e d th e p r o v i s i o ns o f s ec t i o n 8 0I C o f t he A c t a n d s t a t ed t h a t t he b e n e f i t t o cl a i m 1 0 0 % d e d u c ti o n o n a c c o u n t o f su b s t a n t i al e x p a n s i o n w a s a v a i l a b l e a s p e r t h e se c t i o n o nl y t o t h e e x i s t i n g un i t s i . e . w h i c h w er e e x i s t i n g o n t he d a t e t h e s e c t i o n w a s br o ug h t o n S t a t u te i .e . 1 . 4 . 2 0 0 4. Th e Tr i b u n a l h e l d t h a t n e w un d e r t a k i ng s w h i ch c a m e i n t o e x i s te n c e a f t er t h a t d a t e w e r e n o t e n t i t l ed t o c l a i m 1 0 0 % d e du c t i o n of p r o f i t s o n a cc ou n t o f s u b s t an ti a l e x p a n s i o n un d e r t a k e n. I n te r p r e ti n g v a r i o u s s u b - s e c ti o n o f s e c t i o n 8 0I C t h e I . T. A . T. h e l d t h a t a n el i g i b l e u n i t se t up i n t h e S t a te of H i m a c h a l P r a d e s h w a s i n an y c a s e e n t i t l ed t o d e d u c t i o n o f 10 0 % o f i t s e l i g i b l e p r o fi t s fo r a p er i o d o f 5 y e a r s o n l y b e g i n n i n g f rom t h e y e a r i n w h i ch i t b e g a n m a n u f a c t u r i ng a n d i n n o c a s e the s e c ti o n co ul d be i n t e r p re te d so as to allow 100% d e d u c t i o n o f e l i gi b l e p r o f i t s b e yon d t h a t . Since the facts in t h e p r e s en t c a s e d e m o n s t ra t e t h at t h e a s s es s e e un d e r t a k i ng w a s a n e w u n d ert a k i n g w h i c h h ad c o m e i n t o e xi st e n c e a f t er 0 1 . 0 4 . 2 0 04 a n d i t h a d a l s o c l a i me d d e d u c t i o n o f i t s e l i g i bl e p r o f i t s f o r a p e ri o d o f 5 y e a r s , w e f i n d t h a t the i s s u e i s s q u a r e l y c ov e r e d b y t h e d e c i s i on o f t h e I TA T C h a n d i g a r h B e n c h i n th e c as e o f M / s H y c r on E l e c tr o n i c s ( su p r a ) . W e, t h e r e f o r e, find no i n f i rm i t y in the or d er of t he L d . CI T( A p p e a l s ) r e s t r i c ti n g t h e d e d u c t i o n c l a i me d b y t he a s s e s s e e i n t h e pr e s e n t c as e @ 25% o f t h e e l i g i b l e p r o f i t s . 5

8. I n t h e re s u l t , t he a p p e a l o f t he a s s e s s e e i s , th e re f o r e , d i s m i s s e d.

O r d e r p r on o u n c ed i n t h e o p e n cou r t .

                 Sd/-                                                  Sd/-

  (SANJAY GARG)                                           (ANNAPURNA GUPTA)
JUDICIAL MEMBER                                          ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
Dated : 31 s t August, 2017
*Rati*
Copy to:
  1.     The Appellant
  2.     The Respondent
  3.     The CIT(A)
  4.     The CIT
  5.     The DR
                                                Assistant Registrar,
                                                ITAT, Chandigarh