9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 556X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 8 - Shri C. N. Prasad, Judicial Member And Shri A. L. Saini, Accountant Member Appellant by : Shri V. Vidhyadhar Respondent by : Shri Bharat P. Shah ORDER Per C.N. Prasad, JM This appeal has been filed by the Revenue against the order of the CIT(A)-41, Mumbai dated 16.06.2016 for A.Y. 2012-13. 2. The only grievance of the Revenue in this appeal is that the CIT(A) erred in not allowing deduction under Section 80IB(5) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act ) following the decision of his predecessor in assessee s case for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12. 3. At the outset the learned counsel for the assessee submits that the issue in the appeal is squarely covered by the decision of the Coordinate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion 80IB. 4. The learned D.R., on the other hand, vehemently supported the order of the Assessing Officer. 5. We heard the rival submissions and perused the orders of the authorities below. The AO, while completing the assessment, denied deduction under Section 80IB(5) of the Act to the assessee based on the assessment made for A.Y. 2011-12 wherein similar disallowance was made by the AO. On appeal the learned CIT(A), following the order of his predecessor for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-12 allowed the claim of the assessee. On a perusal of the order of the Tribunal for assessment years 2010-11 and 2011-2 we find that the Tribunal allowed the claim of the assessee by observing as under: - 4. Now coming to the appeals filed ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... whether the unit was formed by splitting of any other unit or not has also to be decided on the basis of the facts in the initial assessment year. The CIT(A) in this case has allowed the claim of the assessee and held that the assessee s undertaking has not established by splitting the existing unit of the sister concern. Since the claim of the assessee has been allowed in A.Y. 2007-08 by this Tribunal vide order dated 13.06.2012, therefore in our view the CIT(A) was correct in law in allowing the claim of the assessee. We, therefore, do not find any illegality or infirmity in the order of the CIT(A). Since there is no change in the facts and circumstances during the assessment year under consideration, respectfully following the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
