2017 (5) TMI 1577 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction under section 80IC - 100% claimed by the appellant in the sixth year of operation of new industrial undertaking - Held that - The issue addressed in the present appeal is identical to what has been decided in the case of Hycron Electronics Vs ITO. 2015 (6) TMI 725 - ITAT CHANDIGARH The assessee is a firm engaged in manufacturing of Mono and Master Cartons. The assessee has already claimed deduction under section 80IC of the Act to the extent of 100% eligible profit for five years period from assessment year 2007-08 to 2011-12. The assessee had again claimed 100% deduction against eligible profits in the relevant assessment year 2012-13 which was 6th year of production by claiming substantial expansion of the unit in assessment year 2010-11. Relying upon the aforesaid decision of the ITAT in the case of Hycron Electronics (supra) the claim was rejected by the lower authorities - accordingly respectfully following the precedent the appeal of the assessee is rejected.

Summary

Issues: Appeal against delay in filing, condonation of delay, claim under section 80IC, rejection of claim based on precedent.

The judgment addresses an appeal against a delay in filing related to an order dated 9.3.2016 of Ld. CIT (Appeals), Shimla for assessment year 2012-13. The delay of 64 days in filing the appeal is condoned based on the reasons explained by the assessee, supported by an affidavit. Both parties agreed that the issue in the appeal is similar to a previous decision by the Co-ordinate Bench in the case of Hycron Electronics Vs ITO. The assessee, a firm manufacturing Mono and Master Cartons, had claimed deduction under section 80IC for eligible profits for five years and again for the 6th year in 2012-13 due to substantial expansion in 2010-11. However, based on the precedent, the claim was rejected by the lower authorities, leading to the dismissal of the appeal.

The delay in filing the appeal was initially raised by the counsel for the assessee, stating it was barred by 64 days. The assessee explained that they did not receive the copy of the order from Ld. CIT (Appeals) until it was noticed during a scrutiny assessment of another year. Upon receiving the order, the assessee promptly applied for a certified copy and filed the appeal. The Tribunal, considering the reasons provided, condoned the delay in filing the appeal.

Regarding the substantive issue, it was noted that the claim made by the assessee under section 80IC for the 6th year was rejected by the lower authorities based on a previous decision involving a similar issue. Both representatives agreed that the issue in the present appeal aligned with the decision in the Hycron Electronics case. Given the factual and legal similarities, the Tribunal upheld the rejection of the claim following the precedent set by the Co-ordinate Bench, resulting in the dismissal of the appeal.

In conclusion, the judgment highlights the importance of timely filing of appeals and the significance of precedent in deciding similar cases. The Tribunal, after condoning the delay in filing, upheld the rejection of the claim under section 80IC based on a previous decision, emphasizing consistency in legal interpretations and outcomes.