Search Results Page

Search Results

1 - 10 of 11 (0.42 seconds)

The Commissioner Of Income-Tax vs M/S Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd on 2 December, 2009

If we look at the scheme of the section 80IA(2), it speaks about the "undertaking" or "enterprise" and not the business of the assessee. Admittedly, three wind mills at the 3 locations are independently operated and the financial results are separately worked out. As per sub-sec.(5) of section 80IA, for computing the deduction u/s 80IA(2), the eligible business is to be treated as the only source of income. Sub-sec.(5) of section 80IA has been explained by the Hon'ble High Court and Kerala in the case of CIT Vs. Accel Transmatic Systems Ltd. 230 CTR 206 (Ker) which has been followed by the Ld. CIT(A). The term "business" used in sub-sec.(5) section 80IA in our humble opinion is confined to the independent undertaking and cannot get merged with the other businesses. In Sec. 80IA(2), for claiming deduction "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as such is to be considered. Sec.80IA(2) is charging sections for determining basic eligibility and there is no mention of word "business". Sub-sec.(5) of Sec.80IA speaks of business but same is to be construed as business of "undertaking" or "Enterprise" as referred to in Sub- sec.(2) of Sec.80IA. It is well settled principle of interpretation of statutory provision that they are to be interpreted harmoniously to make workable to give intended results. Hence, as rightly held by Ld. CIT(A) term "business" used in sec.80IA(5) is to be construed and understood to mean "business" or 16 ITA Nos.815,891,1494&1600/PN/2011 M/s. JSons Foundry Pvt. Ltd., Sangli "undertaking or enterprise". In our opinion, the Ld. CIT(A) in his well reasoned order has rightly held that every unit constitute a separate undertaking engaged in the eligible business and losses from one unit cannot be set off against the profits. Another unit engaged in the same business for the purpose of computing the deduction u/s 80IA. We find no reason to interfere with the findings of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue. Accordingly, the same are confirmed and grounds taken by the revenue are dismissed.
Kerala High Court Cites 7 - Cited by 5 - Full Document

M/S Synco Industries Ltd vs Assessing Officer, Income Tax,Mumbai & ... on 13 March, 2008

It would appear therefore, that read with the decision given in Synco case (supra) sections 80IA(1), 80IA(4) and 80IA(5) would render only the profits of the business and not the profits of the individual revenue centres, which in this case are the units located at Satara, Tamil Nadu and Gudhe-Panchgani, as eligible for deduction. Hence, it appears at the first blush that the action of the assessing officer in computing the deduction by aggregating the incomes / profits and gains of all the windmills is correct. However, this is not a correct formula for working out the claim of deduction under section 80IA.
Supreme Court of India Cites 58 - Cited by 76 - J M Panchal - Full Document
1   2 Next