9911796707
TMI Blog2015 (8) TMI 600X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to have taken into consideration that losses from windmill business for the assessment years 2004-05 to 2006-07 have to be set off only against profit from windmill business of the assessment year 2010-11. 3. The Departmental representative places reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer. 4. At the time of hearing, counsel for the assessee submits that this issue is squarely covered by the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in the case of Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2012] 340 ITR 477 (Mad) which the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) followed. Counsel for the assessee supports the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). 5. Heard both sides. Perused orders of the lower authorities and the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... allows the assessee to claim deduction of 100 per cent. of profit derived from the eligible business for 10 consecutive assessment years within a period of 15th assessment year beginning with the assessment year in which the assessee begins operating and maintaining the eligible business. The authorised representative of the appellant is also of the opinion that section 80-IA also allows the assessee to choose the initial assessment year at its option for claiming the deduction. Thus, the appellant had chosen assessment year 2009-10 as its initial assessment year. The authorised representative of the appellant has placed his reliance in the ratio in the case of Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2012] 340 ITR 477 (Mad) whe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 80-IA. The Assessing Officer also agreed with the contention of the appellant for claiming deduction under section 80-IA. However, the Assessing Officer differed with the appellant on the ground that the decision in the case of Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd. v. Asst. CIT [2012] 340 ITR 477 (Mad) has been contested by the Department by filing special leave petition in the hon'ble Supreme Court and denied the claim of the appellant. Subject to final verdict by the Supreme Court in the case of Velayuthasamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd. [2012] 340 ITR 477 (Mad) the contention of the authorised representative of the appellant based on the jurisdictional High Court decision in the case of Velayuthasamy Spinning Mills P. Ltd. is accepte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee by the co-ordinate Bench of this Tribunal in I. T. A. No. 651 and 652/Mds/2013 dated July 31, 2014 [2015] 4 ITR (Trib)-OL 209 following the decision of the hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. My Home Power Ltd. [2014] 365 ITR 82 (AP) observing as under (page 210 of 4 ITR (Trib)- OL) : "5. Heard both sides. On going through the orders of the lower authorities and the decision of the hon'ble Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of CIT v. My Home Power Ltd. [2014] 365 ITR 82 (AP), we find that the issue in these two appeals is squarely covered by the above decision. The Revenue could not point out any contrary decision to the above cited ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the business. We have considered the aforesaid submission and we are unable to accept the same, as the learned Tribunal has factually found that 'carbon credit is not an offshoot of business but an offshoot of environmental concerns. No asset is generated in the course of business but it is generated due to environmental concerns'. We agree with this factual analysis as the assessee is carrying on the business of power generation. The carbon credit is not even directly linked with power generation. On the sale of excess carbon credits the income was received and hence as correctly held by the Tribunal it is capital receipt and it cannot be business receipt or income. In the circumstances, we do not find any element of law in this a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
