9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2013 (1) TMI 688 - AT - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80-IA - Treating the year of first generation of power from the Windmill Undertaking i.e. AY.02-03 as the initial assessment year - Reducing the amount of profits derived from the said undertaking in the year under appeal by the amount of unabsorbed losses and depreciation relating to all the assessment years beginning AY 2002-03 - Held that - Following the decision of Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. Vs. ACIT 2010 (3) TMI 860 - MADRAS HIGH COURT wherein held profits are to be computed as if such eligible business is the only source of income of the assessee. When the assessee exercises the option, only the losses of the years beginning from the initial A.Y. are to be brought forward and not the losses of the earlier years which have been already set off against the income of the assessee - no notional brought forward and set off against the profits of the eligible business as no such mandate is provided in section 80-IA(5). When the assessee exercises the option, only the losses of the years beginning from the initial A.Y. are to be brought forward and not the losses of the earlier years which have been already set off against the income of the assessee. As DR has not brought to the notice of the Bench any decision contrary on the issue in question it is to be held that the assessee is eligible for claim of deduction u/s 80-IA for the year under consideration in a manner whereby the initial assessment year referred to in section 80-IA(5) is to be taken as the A.Y. 2004-05 as the assessee has opted to claim this deduction only in this assessment year - in favour of assessee.
Issues Involved:
1. Determination of the "initial assessment year" for the purposes of Section 80IA(5). 2. Treatment of unabsorbed losses and depreciation for the purposes of deduction under Section 80IA. Detailed Analysis: Issue 1: Determination of the "Initial Assessment Year" for Section 80IA(5) The assessee questioned the determination of the "initial assessment year" for the purposes of Section 80IA(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee claimed that the initial assessment year should be the year when the deduction under Section 80IA was first claimed, rather than the year of the first generation of power from the windmill undertaking. The assessee argued that Section 80IA(2) grants an option to choose any 10 consecutive years within a block of 15 years for claiming the deduction, and thus, the initial assessment year should be the first year when the deduction is claimed. The Tribunal referred to the decision of the Pune Bench in the case of Poonawalla Stud and Agro Farm Pvt. Ltd. vs. ACIT, which held that the initial assessment year for the purpose of Section 80IA(5) is the first year in which the assessee claims the deduction after exercising the option as per Section 80IA(2). The Tribunal agreed with this interpretation and concluded that the initial assessment year should be the year in which the assessee first claimed the deduction under Section 80IA. Issue 2: Treatment of Unabsorbed Losses and Depreciation for Deduction under Section 80IA The second issue was whether unabsorbed losses and depreciation from earlier years, which had been set off against other income, should be considered for the purpose of computing the deduction under Section 80IA. The assessee contended that only the losses and depreciation starting from the initial assessment year (as per their chosen year) should be considered, and not those from prior years that had already been set off. The Tribunal noted that the Assessing Officer (A.O.) had notionally brought forward unabsorbed depreciation from earlier years and denied the deduction under Section 80IA, following the Special Bench decision in the case of ACIT vs. Goldmine Shares and Finance (P) Ltd. However, the Tribunal referred to the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court in the case of Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd vs. ACIT, which held that only the losses beginning from the initial assessment year should be brought forward and not the losses of earlier years already set off against other income. The Tribunal emphasized that the decision of the Hon'ble Madras High Court should be followed, as it is binding precedent until a contrary decision is given by any other competent High Court. The Tribunal also cited the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in Commissioner of Central Excise vs. Valson Dyeing, Bleaching and Printing Works, which reinforced the principle that Tribunal must follow the decisions of High Courts, even if they are from different states, in the absence of a contrary decision. Conclusion: The Tribunal set aside the orders of the authorities below and directed the A.O. to allow the claimed deduction under Section 80IA without bringing forward any notional losses or depreciation from earlier years that had already been set off against other income. The appeals were allowed in favor of the assessee. Pronouncement: The order was pronounced in the open Court on 28.9.2011.
|
