9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (3) TMI 498 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IC rejected - claim of the assessee rejected on the ground that the assessee has established the unit at Baddi by reconstruction of the existing unit - Held that - The assessee has furnished the details of employees, electricity bills and water bills issued by The Himachal Pradesh State Industrial Development Corporation Ltd. The assessee has also furnished the letter issued by the Deputy Director of Industries, Baddi, Dist. Solan (H.P) allocating the undertaking of the assessee as Micro/small/Medium scale Enterprise for manufacturing of Additives We have earlier noticed that the assessee qualifies under the category of Substantial Expansion of the unit and hence we are of the view that the provisions of sec. 80IC(4) shall not come in the way of the assessee in claiming deduction u/s 80IC of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee
Issues:
Claim for deduction u/s 80IC rejected by AO - Violation of sec. 80IC(4)(i) - Reconstruction of existing business - Admissibility of deduction u/s 80IC for substantial expansion - Interpretation of "substantial expansion" as per sec. 80IC(8)(ix) - Compliance with conditions for deduction u/s 80IC - Dispute regarding establishment of unit at Baddi - Consideration of old plant and machinery - Claim for deduction based on substantial expansion, not unit setup. Analysis: The appeal challenges the order confirming the rejection of the claim for deduction u/s 80IC made by the assessee for the assessment year 2008-09. The AO rejected the claim citing violation of sec. 80IC(4)(i) due to the establishment of the unit in Baddi as reconstruction of existing business, as per the Ld CIT(A). The Ld CIT(A) upheld the AO's decision, considering the shifting of business activities from Wada to Baddi as reconstruction of business. The assessee contended that substantial expansion qualifies for deduction u/s 80IC, meeting the definition provided in sec. 80IC(8)(ix) with investments in new machinery. The Ld A.R argued for the eligibility of deduction based on substantial expansion, while the Ld D.R supported the Ld CIT(A)'s order. A thorough examination of sec. 80IC reveals that the deduction is available for undertakings undertaking substantial expansion, not specified in the Thirteenth Schedule. The assessee, engaged in manufacturing fuel additives, fulfilled this criterion. The value of new machinery purchased in 2007-08 exceeded 50% of the book value of plant & machinery in 2007, indicating substantial expansion. Despite authorities' claim of reconstruction, the assessee provided evidence of establishing a new unit at Baddi, supported by documents from relevant authorities. The Ld A.R argued that the unit's setup at Baddi involved the use of old machinery within permissible limits under sec. 80IC, emphasizing the claim's basis on substantial expansion, not reconstruction. The Tribunal found merit in the Ld A.R's submissions, recognizing the assessee's eligibility for deduction u/s 80IC due to substantial expansion. Consequently, the Tribunal set aside the Ld CIT(A)'s order and directed the AO to allow the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80IC. The appeal by the assessee was allowed, emphasizing the adherence to the conditions for deduction under sec. 80IC. The judgment was pronounced on 3rd Feb, 2016, in favor of the assessee.
|
