9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (11) TMI 308X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... year 2004-05 – No any change in facts and circumstances in the present assessment year also. In such facts and circumstances, no any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) – Decided against the Revenue. - ITA No.886/Bang/2009 - - - Dated:- 30-8-2013 - Shri N. V. Vasudevan And Shri Jason P. Boaz,JJ. For the Appellant : Shri P. Chandrashekar, Addl. DIT For the Respondent : Dr. C. P. Ramaswami, Advocate ORDER Per N.V. Vasudevan, Judicial Member This appeal by the revenue is against the order dated 25.06.2009 of CIT(Appeals)-I, Bangalore relating to assessment year 2005-06. 2. The grounds of appeal raised by the revenue reads as follows:- "1. The Order of the learned CIT(A)-I is opposed t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 143(3), while disallowing the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80IA of the I.T. Act, 1961. 7. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have considered that it is well settled principle of law that the assessment order for each assessment year is separate and distinct and that the decision on any issue for one assessment year will not operate as res judicata for any subsequent year. 8. For these and such other grounds that may be urged at the time of hearing it is prayed that the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals) be cancelled and that the order of the Assessing Officer be restored." 3. The assessee established a manufacturing unit in Soolagiri Block of Dharmapuri District, Tamil Nadu, for manufa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessment year 1996-97 read as under :- (c) in the case of an industrial undertaking located in such industrially backward district as the Central Government may, having regard to the prescribed guidelines, by notification in the Official Gazette, specify in this behalf, it begins to manufacture or produce articles or things or to operate its cold storage plant or plants at any time during the period beginning on the 1st day of October, 1994 and ending on the 31st day of March, 1999;" 7. The assessee submitted before the AO that it set up its unit after 1 day of October, 1994, i.e. in August 1995, and till that time the Central Government did not notify in the Official Gazette "such industrially backward districts", it was reasonably ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s not in Hosur block of Dharmapuri District. Consequently it has been an eligible unit in terms of Section 80IA, to begin with. Though in the retrospective notification, Dharmapuri District of Tamil Nadu was not included as an industrially backward area, such notification could be made applicable prospectively and not retrospectively. 9. The Assessing Officer did not agree with the submissions of the made on behalf of the assessee. He held as follows:- "15. Summing up briefly, the assessee company's main basis for taking the deduction is its assumption that the Government had promised to extend the benefit of deduction to the area where it was set up, as prevailing earlier in the Schedule VIII read with provision of S.8OHH. The righteou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... when the company started making profits and there was an attempt to reduce the tax liability, they hit upon this clause. And even though knowing fully well that they are not entitled to, made claims by extending to themselves on their own accord deductions and provision which were never there right from the beginning. 16. Can deduction be allowed on the grounds that it was allowed in the earlier years? 16.1 As regards the allowance of deduction this year simply because it was allowed in the earlier 4 years is like arguing that since you have not done anything for 4 mistakes, you can as well allow the 5th mistake. As each year's proceedings in Income tax is different and independent, and each deduction has to be seen in the light of its ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s been brought on record to show that the said decision of the Tribunal has been reversed/modified by the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court. Hence, as on date, the decision holding the field is that of the Tribunal for the assessment year 2004-05. We do not find any change in facts and circumstances in the present assessment year also. In such facts and circumstances, we do not find any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) in following the decision of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for assessment year 2004-05, while allowing the assessee's appeal in respect of 80IA deduction. Hence, we dismiss the Revenue's appeal." 12. The ld. DR submitted that the revenue is in appeal against the order of the Tribunal for ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
