9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 759X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Court is of the opinion that matter deserves to be heard on merits. The Review Petition No.154/2012 is accordingly allowed. ITA 1660/2006 1. The question of law urged by the Revenue in respect of its appeal against the order of the ITAT dated 31.3.2006 in ITA 1840/del/2002, is whether the amount of loss suffered in the Avitech Division was rightly set off by the AO against the profits from the eligible vaccine unit for the purpose of computing the deduction under Section-80IA, thereby reducing the deduction. 2. The brief facts are that the assessee company was engaged in the business of manufacturing poultry vaccines in collaboration with Vineland Laboratories, USA. It claimed that it had opened another unit, i.e., Animal Healt ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 34,485/-. In this division, it is submitted that during the financial year 1999-2000, the business of this division reached stability and earned a net profit of Rs.24,89,324/- and the deduction u/s 80IA has not been claimed on this profit. A copy of the Profit & Loss A/c of M/s Avitech Division has been enclosed. The deduction u/s 80IA has been allowed on the profit of the company after reducing the loss of Avitech from profit of Vaccine Division, and in this respect the copies of computation of total income for the assessment year 2000-01 and 2001-02 have been filed revealing that the company has not claimed deduction u/s 80 on the profits of this Division. In view of the same and keeping in view the provisions of section 90IA of the I.T. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... passed by learned CIT (Appeals)." 4. It is argued by Mr. N.P. Sahni, Sr. Standing Counsel for the Revenue that a fair and objective reading of the record would reveal that the assessee's claim was inadmissible under Section-80IA because the second Unit was located within the same premises and could not, therefore, be characterised as a "separate undertaking". Learned counsel especially relied upon paragraph-12 of the Commissioner (A)'s order and also emphasizes that in the question of law framed this aspect has been highlighted in the pleadings of the Revenue. Counsel urged that once the assessee decided to open the separate division in the same premises, he cannot claim the benefit of Section 80IA as far as that activity is concerned. 5. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
