Calcutta High Court
Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Shivam Coke Pvt Ltd on 27 August, 2008
Author: Pinaki Chandra Ghose
Bench: Pinaki Chandra Ghose
1
ITA No. 445 of 2008
G.A.No.1927 of 2008
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction(Income tax)
ORIGINAL SIDE
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX,KOLKATA-I Plaintiff/Petitioner/Applicant
Versus
SHIVAM COKE PVT LTD Defendant/Respondent
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE The Hon'ble JUSTICE SANKAR PRASAD MITRA Date : 27th August, 2008.
The Court : We are satisfied with the grounds made in the petition for condonation of delay. Hence, the delay in filing the application is condoned and we allow the application being G.A.No. 1927 of 2008. G.A.No. 1927 of 2008 is thus disposed of.
We now take up the appeal. We have heard the learned Advocate appearing in support of the appeal. We have perused the order passed by the Tribunal. The only question is whether the rejected coal was, in fact, a product of manufacturing activities of the assessee company and, therefore, entitle them to get deduction under section 80-IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
It appears that starting from the Assessing Officer until the matter is reached to the learned Tribunal, the appellant has lost the matter. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has dealt with the matter extensively and after assessing the facts and materials on record placed before it and came to the conclusion that the deduction under Section 80- IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is admissible with reference to the profit derived from industrial undertaking and since industrial activity has 2 resulted in output by way of metallurgical coke and rejected coal, the entire net profit computed out of sale of these two products has to be considered. Accordingly, after dealing with the facts and after taking into consideration the materials on record, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) came to the conclusion that the Assessee Company is entitled to such deduction under section 80IB.
The only point taken before us by Mr. D.K.Shome, learned Senior Advocate appearing in support of the appeal is that the learned Tribunal has passed a cryptic order and no reason has been given by the said learned Tribunal. We, after careful consideration of the matter, are satisfied with the reasons given by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the learned Tribunal has only relied upon the same. We have no other way than to accept the reasoning given by Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) which have been followed by the learned Tribunal. We, therefore, do not find any reason to interfere with the order so passed by the learned Tribunal nor the order so passed by the learned Tribunal suffers from any illegality or irregularity. Hence, we do not feel it necessary to interfere with the order so passed by the learned Tribunal nor to admit the appeal under section 260A of the Act. We also find that no substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. Hence, the appeal being ITA No. 445 of 2008 is dismissed.
Urgent xerox certified copy of this order, if applied for, be supplied to the parties subject to compliance with all requisite formalities.
(PINAKI CHANDRA GHOSE, J.) (SANKAR PRASAD MITRA, J.) km