9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 899X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ood, JJ. For the Appellant : Shri J S Nagar For the Respondent : Shri Vishal Mohan ORDER:- PER : T R Sood The appeal by the revenue is directed against the order passed by the Ld. CIT(A), Shimla, H.P. on 09/08/2012 2. In this appeal the Revenue has raised the following grounds:- 1. On the facts and in the circumstances, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the deduction of Rs. 55,70,119/- to the assessee which was disallowed by the Assessing Officer u/s 80IC of the Income Tax Act. 2. It is prayed that the order of Ld. CIT(A) be set-aside and that of Assessing Officer restored. 3. After hearing both the parties, we find that during assessment proceedings the Assessing Officer noticed that assessee has claimed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ld not be previously used for any purpose. In response to this query, it was stated as under:- "In respect of your query raised by your good self regarding installation of previously used machinery, it is submitted that the assessee firm has not installed any previously used machinery in India. The machineries were purchased from M/s Printers Park India which were imported from abroad and was used there only. Therefore, the assessee fulfills the conditions laid under section 80-IC, as it has not installed any previously used machinery in India." 4. The Assessing Officer after examining the above reply was not convinced because no documentary evidence were furnished to support the assessee's claim. Accordingly, deduction u/s 80IC was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ed vide assessment order passed u/s 143(3) even in assessment year 2007-08 on the same footing, copy of which is placed at pages 43 to 46 of the paper book In that year even an affidavit of M/s Printers Park, Chennai was submitted before the Assessing Officer. The contents of the Affidavit have been extracted by Assessing Officer in assessment year 2007-08 as under:- "We have imported the SEYPA 36" PAPER CUTTING MACHINE from M/s SOUTH EAST TRADING INC OF USA for re-sale and we have not used this machine for any kind of cutting or any other production in India after the import. We sold the above machine to M/s SHRIRAM PRINTN PACK vide our invoice no. 29 dated 02-02-2007" 10. Even the bills of lading were filed but still the Assessing ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A.O. had suspected any of the facts stated by the appellant or the Printers Park, he should have conducted independent enquiries and brought something tangible on record to controvert the claim of the appellant. However, the Ld. A.O. has done nothing in this regard. He has simply proceed on the basis of surmises and conjectures and assumed that the machinery was put to use in India after the import before the appellant bought the same from the Printers Park. 4.1 Further enquiries were got conducted through the assessing officer during the course of appellate proceedings. As per the report submitted by the assessing officer, the business of M/s. Printers Park is to import the used printing machines and to sell the same. They have got n ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... see shall not be regarded as machinery or plant previously used for any purpose, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely :- (a) such machinery or plant was not, at any time previous to the date of the installation by the assessee, used in India; (b) such machinery or plant is imported into India from any country outside India: and (c) no deduction on account of depreciation in respect of such machinery or plant has been allowed or is allowable under the provisions of this Act in computing the total income of any person for any period prior to the date of the installation of machinery or plant by the assessee." Further, the explanation to section 80IC(4) reads as under:- "Explanation- The provision ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
