9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (4) TMI 1627X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... A) erred in allowing deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(iv) of the I.T. Act, 1961 of Rs. 43,56,397/- (Tax effect Rs. 13,46,126/-) ignoring the fact that the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA(4)(iv). 2. The Ld. CIT(A) failed to appreciate that as per section 80IA(5) r.w.s. 80IA(4)(iv) the quantum of deduction be computed of eligible business as its only source of income and if brought forward unabsorbed depreciation are set off against current year's income, there will be no profit left so as to allow deduction u/s 80IA(4)(iv). 3. The appellant prays that the order of the Ld. CIT(A) be vacated and that of the Assessing Officer's order may be restored. 3. The issue raised in the present appeal filed by the Revenue is against order of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment year and for every subsequent years and unabsorbed depreciation on windmill had to be allowed against the profit of such business. However, the assessee had claimed unabsorbed depreciation on windmill for the earlier years against other business of assessee and hence, was showing profit from the windmill for subsequent assessment years. The Assessing Officer notes that similar claim was disallowed in earlier year, which was allowed by the CIT(A) but the Revenue had preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. Hence, to keep the issue alive, disallowance was made in the hands of assessee on account of deduction claimed under section 80IA(4) of the Act. 6. The CIT(A) vide para 6.6 onwards at page 21 of the appellate order considered the sai ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue in the case is that the assessee had claimed the deduction under section 80IA(4)(iv) of the Act for the first time in assessment year 2010-11. Hence the provisions of section 80IA(5) of the Act would be applicable only from assessment year 2010-11 onwards. Relying on series of decisions and also the order of CIT(A) for assessment year 2010-11, the claim of assessee was allowed and the order of Assessing Officer was reversed by the CIT(A). 7. The Revenue is in appeal against the order of CIT(A). 8. The learned Departmental Representative for the Revenue pointed out that the issue stands covered against the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in CIT Vs. Hercules Hoists Ltd. in Income Tax Appeal No.707 of 2014, ju ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aneously carrying on business of civil construction, from which the assessee was making profits. The said losses were adjusted against the income arising from other business activity of the assessee. For the first time, the windmill activity had shown profit in assessment year 2010-11 and the assessee claimed deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act. The said year i.e. assessment year 2010-11 was the initial assessment year for claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) of the Act. The CIT(A) at page 22 has given a finding that there were no brought forward losses in the hands of assessee and the same were adjusted upto assessment year 2009-10. The Assessing Officer for assessment year 2010-11 had not allowed the claim of deduction on accou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
