9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2022 (9) TMI 1143 - AT - Income TaxAddition u/s 80IC - company stated to be engaged in the business of induction Heat Seal Cap liner material and Induction Wads - products manufactured by the assessee fall under schedule 13 (at serial No. 19) which is a negative list and, therefore, profit derived from the manufacture of these products is not eligible for deduction -HELD THAT - We find that the issues involved in this matter are directly and substantially covered in assessee's own case in earlier years 2021 (10) TMI 516 - ITAT DELHI and while respectfully following the same we hold that the assessee is entitled to deduction under section 80 IC and the addition by disallowance of the same, is directed to be deleted. - Decided in favour of assessee.
Issues:
Disallowance under section 80IC of the Income-tax Act. Analysis: The case involved an appeal by the Revenue against the order of the ld. CIT (Appeals)-34, New Delhi for the Assessment Year 2014-15 regarding the disallowance under section 80IC of the Act. The assessee, engaged in the business of induction Head Seal Cap liner material and induction wads, had filed a return declaring income of Rs.4,22,56,630/-. The AO disallowed a deduction claimed under section 80IC of Rs.1,75,43,557/-, citing that the product manufactured by the assessee fell under the negative list of products not eligible for the deduction. The ld. CIT (A) allowed the deduction based on the decision in the assessee's own case for AY 2010-11. The ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s decision, emphasizing the principle of judicial consistency and the absence of material changes justifying a different view. The Revenue's appeal was dismissed, as the facts were found to be similar to the earlier years where the deduction was allowed. The Revenue raised grounds of appeal against the disallowance under section 80IC, contesting the decision of the CIT(A) to grant the deduction based on the ITAT's decision in the assessee's own case for earlier years. The ITAT, in its detailed analysis, highlighted that the issues in the present case were directly covered by the decisions in the assessee's earlier cases. The ITAT noted that no new material was presented to show any variance in facts for the current assessment year, and the previous orders had not been overturned by a higher judicial forum. Consequently, the ITAT upheld the CIT(A)'s order, maintaining that the assessee was entitled to the deduction under section 80IC, and dismissed the Revenue's appeal. In conclusion, the ITAT affirmed the decision of the ld. CIT (A) to grant the deduction under section 80IC to the assessee, based on the principle of judicial consistency and the absence of any material changes justifying a different outcome. The ITAT emphasized that the facts in the current year were similar to those in the earlier cases where the deduction was allowed. Therefore, the Revenue's appeal was dismissed, and the order in favor of the assessee was upheld.
|
