9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 994X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Revenue. - I.T.A.No.236/Mds/2016 - - - Dated:- 11-8-2016 - Shri Chandra Poojari, Accountant Member and Shri Duvvuru RL Reddy, Judicial Member For The Appellant : Shri A.V. Sreekanth, JCIT For The Respondent : Shri A.S. Sriraman, Advocate ORDER PER DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER: This appeal filed by the Revenue is directed against the order of the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) 1, Madurai dated 27.11.2015 relevant to the assessment year 2011-12. The only effective ground raised by the Revenue is that the ld. CIT(A) has erred in holding that the claim under section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 [ Act in short] is to be granted without setting off of the losses against the profits of the Aluminium ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction under section 80IB without setting off of the losses against the profits of the other unit namely Aluminium Paste Unit. He also relied on the decision in the case of Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer 299 ITR 444 (SC). 5. On the other hand, the ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue involved in this appeal is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for earlier assessment year and supported the order passed by the ld. CIT(A). 6. We have heard both sides, perused the materials on record and gone through the orders of authorities below. We have also perused the copy of the order of the Tribunal in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2010-11 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n their decision in the case of Chamundi Textiles (Silk Mills) Ltd. v. CIT (341 ITR 488). There the question was regarding claim of deduction under Section 80HHC and whether such deduction could be allowed without considering the results of a unit, which was not having any profits. It was held by their Lordships that by virtue of the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of IPCA Laboratories Ltd. v. CIT (266 ITR 521), undisputedly only an assessee having positive profits could claim such a deduction. Their Lordship also held that for arriving at such profit, income from various units had to be calculated and if one of the units was running at a loss, gross total income had to be arrived considering such loss also. Ultimately, if th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . CIT (219 ITR 563). Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of L.M. Chhabda Sons. v. CIT (65 ITR 638) has also held that where an assessee carried on business ventures at different places, there was no general principle that they should all be considered as part of single business. Thus, if an assessee had different units resulting in positive gross total income, in view of decisions of Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Macmillan India Ltd. (295 ITR 67), CIT v. Rathore Brothers (254 ITR 656), CIT vs. Suresh B. Mehta (291 ITR 462) and CIT v. M. Gani And Co. (301 ITR 381), each of the unit had to be separately considered for working out deduction under Section 80-IA or 80-IB or 80HHC of the Act, once separate accounts ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
