9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (6) TMI 731X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... pellant has been granted registration/approval from various regulatory and Government authorities and has paid excise duty on the articles manufactured by it. For all the above stated reasons, it is held the appellant is entitled to the deduction u/s 80IC in respect of its manufacturing activities X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ss where the sand is thrown through high speed compressed air in order to remove the carbon scaling on the surface of the components and assemblies. Painting The components are painted with anti rust primer with the help of air compressor. Dispatch to client factory site after inspection Erection at site Some of the components have to be placed on the bases to show the accuracy vis a vis perpendicularity and height. 3. The A.O. had relied on the judgement of the Hon'ble High Court in the case of CIT vs. N.C.Budharaja & Co. 204 ITR 402 (SC) and the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Builders Association of India vs. CIT 209 ITR 877 (S.C.). The Ld.CIT(A) on the other hand held that these decisions are not applicable to the facts of the case. He opined that the decision of AP High Court in the case of Beehive Engineering Co. and Allid Industries Ltd. 221 ITR 561 is applicable to the facts of the case. 4. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us on the following grounds. "1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case the ld.CIT(A) has erred in law in holding that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing activity and eligible for deduction u/s 80 IC ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ii. CIT vs. Elemech Industrial Constructions, 229 ITR 503 (A.P.) iii. CIT vs. Northern Aromatics Ltd., 326 ITR 27 (P&H) iv. CIT vs. Alcam Engineering P.Ltd., 336 ITR 294 (Mad) 7. In reply the Ld.D.R. relied on some survey findings. He distinguished the case laws relied upon by the assessee. 8. After hearing rival contentions, we are of the considered opinion that the order of the First Appellate Authority has to be upheld for the reason that, the facts of the case clearly demonstrate that the assessee has manufactured an article or a thing. The ld.CIT(A) in the order dt. 30.1.2012 for the AY 2008-09 has discussed the issue at length. At para 6 and 7 of his order he held as follows:- "(6) I have also called for and examined the purchase order placed on the appellant by M/s. Dharmpal Premchand Ltd. dated 07.07.2006 for the fabrication, supply, shot/sand blasting, painting and erection of 1500 MT of steel structures for its steel project at Agartala. As per the order, the entire work was to be executed strictly in conformity with technical details provided to the appellant through detailed fabrication drawings made available by M/s. Dharampal Premchand Ltd. As held by the H ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... by the Assessing Officer, namely the few numbers of regular employees, and the deserted appearance of the factory shed, have been satisfactorily explained by the appellant. There can be no reasonable doubt that the appellant manufactured trusses, columns, gantries, etc. in its factory and transported these articles to the project site of M/s. Dharmapal Premchand where these articles were erected by fastening bolts on the civil work already completed by M/s. Dharampal Premchand. The appellant has carried out customised fabrication of the steel structure as per drawings provided by the contractee. The appellant has been granted registration/approval from various regulatory and Government authorities and has paid excise duty on the articles manufactured by it. For all the above stated reasons, it is held the appellant is entitled to the deduction u/s 80IC in respect of its manufacturing activities. The disallowance of ₹ 3,29,76,090/- is accordingly deleted." 9. This decision is in line with the judgement of Hon'ble A.P.High Court in the case of CIT vs. Beehive Engineering Co. and Allied Industries Ltd. (supra) where the facts and decisions are as follows: "The assessee, a pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
