9911796707
TMI Blog2019 (5) TMI 340X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... u/s 32(1)(iia) was granted without any deliberation by the Assessing Officer, we are of the view that the assessment order dated 16.02.2016 is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. Therefore, the CIT had correctly invoked his revisionary power u/s 263. - Decided against assessee We are not aware of the fate of the order of Cochin Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Cochin Frozen Food Exports Pvt. Ltd. [ 2012 (4) TMI 757 - ITAT COCHIN] . We are also not aware of the processes undertaken in that case whether it is identical / similar to the processes undertaken by the assessee in the instant case. The Assessing Officer shall compare the processes undertaken by the assessee in the instant case and that of the assessee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 4. For these and other grounds that may be permitted to be adduced at the time of hearing of the case, it is prayed that the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax u/s 263 may be set aside / cancelled. 3. The brief facts of the case are as follows: The assessee is a company engaged in the business of processing and export of frozen marine products. For the assessment year 2013-2014, the return of income was filed on 29.09.2013 declaring a total income of ₹ 4,02,98,905. Scrutiny assessment was completed vide order dated 16.02l2016 determining total taxable income at ₹ 5,07,61,900. 3.1 Notice was issued u/s 263 of the I.T.Act by the CIT for the reason that in the order co ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t eligible for claiming additional depreciation under Section 31(1)(iia). From a perusal of the records, it is noticed that this aspect has not been considered while framing the Assessment Order. The Assessee- Company is engaged in the business of export of finished frozen marine products. It has now listed out various processes involved in its operation in a general manner. Its reference to Section 10B will not help its cause since this Section works in a totally different plane altogether. The business carried on by the assessee namely, processing and export of frozen marine products would not come under `manufacture or production of new article or thing as held by Hon ble ITAT, Cochin Bench in the case of M/s.Cochin Frozen Food Exports ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... hing, hence the assessee was entitled to additional depreciation u/s 32(1)(iia) of the I.T.Act. The learned AR has filed a brief written submission. The relevant portion of the same reads as follows:- The assessment order is set aside for de-novo examination and passing a speaking order in accordance with law. It may appear that the assessing officer has the liberty to examine the issue afresh. But in Paragraph 5 of the order the Commissioner has made various observations which make it obligatory on the part of the assessing officer to disallow the claim for additional depreciation. Even with reference to the finding of the Kerala High Court regarding the exemption u/s.10B, the Commissioner has observed that its reference ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the apprehension of the assessee is that though in paragraph 6 of the impugned order of the CIT had set aside the assessment for de novo examination, in paragraph 5 of the order of the CIT, various observations are made which make it obligatory on the part of the Assessing Officer to disallow the claim of additional depreciation. The learned AR had submitted before us that the assessee has undertaken various processes which is technically superior to the conventional method of preservation of seafood for the purpose of export. It was stated that the said processes tantamount to manufacture or production. Therefore, the assessee was entitled to deduction u/s 32(1)(iia) of the I.T.Act. Further, the learned Counsel submitted t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
