9911796707
TMI Blog2012 (6) TMI 893X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... .N. Sesha Gopal ORDER PER SAKTIJIT DEY, JM: This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order of the CIT(A)-III, Hyderabad dated 12.11.2010 for assessment year 2007-08. 2. In the grounds raised the Revenue has basically challenged the allowance of deduction claimed u/s. 80IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 by the CIT(A) on the captive power generation plant of the assessee. 3. At the tim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t report in prescribed form No. 10CCB along with audited accounts in respect of such undertaking. Even though the Assessing Officer has admitted the fact that for the A.Ys. 2001-02 to 2003-04 and again for the A.Ys. 2004-05 to 2006-07, the ITAT in assessee's own case has allowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA of the Act, he, however, disallowed the claim of deduction u/s. 80IA on the reasoni ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The CIT(A) in his order has held in the following lines: "5. I have carefully considered the submissions of the Id. AR and the facts of the case. I have gone through the said order dated 18.05.2007 of the Hon'ble jurisdictional Tribunal passed in the case of the appellant for the Asst. Years 2001-02 to 2003-04 and the subsequent order dated 15.10.2009 passed for Asst. Years 2004-05 to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... /De1/03 dated 26.03.2004, in para 18 of the said order, the Hon'ble Tribunal held that steam is a form of power and undertakings engaged in generation of steam, is eligible for deduction u/s. 80IA. In para 19 of the said order, the Hon'ble Tribunal further held that in respect of each such unit the appellant has maintained separate accounts, substantiating such claim for deduction. In para ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... delines contained in said paras 24 to 26 of the said order dated 18.05.2007 and allow the deduction u/s. 80IA." 5. After hearing the contention of the learned CIT DR and going through the order passed by the CIT(A) as above, we find the issue is squarely covered by the ITAT Hyderabad Bench orders in assessee's own case for the earlier assessment years. We, therefore, find no justification i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
