9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... se." 4. At the time of hearing it was. fairly agreed by both the sides that the issue in this appeal being against deletion of disallowance of claim of assessee u/s 80IB of the Act the issue was squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Yrs. 2007-08 and 2008-09 in No.2227/Kol/2010 dated 20th March, 2013 and ITA No.827/Kol/2012 dated 13th August, 2013 respectively wherein in para 8 of order of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in ITA No.2227/Kol/2010 dated 20th March, 2012 the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal has held as follows :- "8. In the ground no.4, the assessee claimed deduction under section 80IB in respect of income derived from the undertaking at Hajipur, district-Vaishali, Bihar for the manufacture of poultry feed being category-A industrially backward district notified by the Central Government. The AO took the view that the assessee could not be considered to be engaged in the manufacture of a product. When the matter went before the CIT(A), the CIT(A), relying on the decision of the ITAT, Kolkata bench in the case of the assessee's sister concern Amrit Feeds Ltd. and Amrit Hatcheries Pvt. Ltd. took the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 10 years u/s 801B(4) of the Act where the undertaking was located in any of the North Eastern States. Deduction both u/s 801B (4) & (5) could be allowed only if newly set up industrial undertaking was engaged in manufacture and production of an article. The Tribunal held that if poultry feed industry was considered eligible by the Central Government for claiming deduction u/s 801B(4) then the same industry could not be considered to be not eligible for deduction u/s 8016(5) on the ground at it was not engaged in manufacture or production of an article. Since facts of the appellant's case are pari-materia, the decision of the jurisdictional ITAT is squarely binding on me. 7.3 In the impugned order the AO in the first instance held that in the production process explained by the appellant, there was no change in chemical composition of the end product and therefore there was no manufacture. However, in the latter part, the AO himself contradicted this finding by observing that in the heating conditions the chemicals such as; Potassium Iodate and Potassium Chloride debonded separating iodine and chlorine which made the poultry feed poisonous. In it there was facit admission by the A ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... did appeared to be have been based on any scientific or technical data. Moreover, the ITAT, Kolkata on the identical facts has held that the poultry feed manufacturing undertakings are eligible for claiming u/s 801B(5). The decision of the ITAT, Kolkata being higher jurisdictional forum is binding on me. The Central Government has notified the poultry feed manufacturing industry to be an eligible industry for claiming deduction u/s 801B(4). There being no change in the factual matrix in the appealant's case; the only conclusion that can be drawn on the facts of the case is that the appellant's Hajipur undertaking was engaged in production of an article. For the reasons discussed in the foregoing therefore I hold that the appellant was entitled for claiming deduction u/s 801B(5). The AO shall accordingly allow the deduction with reference to the assessed business income of the said undertaking." 9. We have heard the rival submissions. The only issue involved in this ground relates to whether the assessee is engaged in the manufacture of a production of an article so that it may be eligible for deduction under section 80IB. This issue has duly been decided by this Bench in assessee' ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s to be interpreted liberally the restriction thereon too has to be construed so as to advance the objective of the provision and not to frustrate it. Conditions of Sec 801B (2) (iii) should be fulfilled by every new industrial undertaking claiming deduction either/under sub sec (3) (4) or (5) of Sec 80 IB i.e. to say the undertaking must be engaged in manufacture or production of an article. If this condition is not fulfilled no deduction is permissible under any of the sub sections of Sec 801B. The industrial undertakings notified and approved by the Central Govt. and situated in North Eastern States are eligible for tax holiday for period of 10 years' as against period of 5 years available to other backwards states. In Notification No. SO 627 (E) dated 04.08.1999 the Central Government has recognised poultry and cattle feed industry, to be an eligible industry u/s 80 IB (4). Once the Central Government notified the poultry 'feed industry u/s 80 IB (4) then there is a tacit admission that it is engaged in "manufacture or production of an article". This is so because unless poultry feed industry does not manufacture an article; no deduction can be permissible u/s 80 IB. Once the C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
