9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (1) TMI 1916X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... fically by each of the co-owners/ assessee. Therefore, this ground also fails. Needless to say, in assessment year 2009-10 the issue has been decided in assessee s favour. For the impugned assessment year as well, no justifiable ground is there to adopt a different view. - I.T.A.Nos.2145 to 2148/Mds/2013 - - - Dated:- 31-1-2014 - SHRI A. MOHAN ALANKAMONY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER Appellant by : Shri N. Madhavan, JCIT Respondent by : Shri N.C. Prabhakar, Advocate O R D E R PER S.S.GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER These appeals filed by the Revenue for assessment years 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09 and 2010-11, are directed against a common order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-I ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tional ownership and joint operation, the operation of the ship was done by West Asia Maritime Ltd. and the assessee company is sharing profits without actual operation and therefore ought to have upheld the addition. 3. In the course of hearing, the Revenue vehemently reiterates the pleadings and submits that the impugned disallowance qua eligibility of the assessee-company for the benefit of tonnage tax ought not to have been deleted by the CIT(A). Accordingly, it prays for acceptance of the appeals. 4. The assessee supports the order of the CIT(A) by filing a copy of the order passed by the tribunal dated 18.9.2013 in I.T.A.No. 1406/Mds/2013 for assessment year 2009-10 in its own case and prays for upholding the CIT(A) s findi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessment year 2009-10, the CIT(A) has held the assessee eligible for the benefit of tonnage tax scheme, as under: 4.2 I have carefully considered the facts of the case and the submissions of the learned AR. I have also gone through the approval given by the Addl. CIT u/s.115VP (3) in his letter dated 28.1.2005. I find that the appellant is one of the Co-owners of the ship m.v.Gem of Ennore along with three other co-owners having the following share. i) East Coast Terminal Operations Port Services Ltd. 50% ii) West Asia Maritime Ltd 20% iii) Four M Maritime Pvt. Ltd 10% iv) BuhariHoldings Pvt. Ltd (Appellant) 20% Similar issue has been dealt with by my predecessors in the appellant's co-owner's case and also in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of both parties, we find that in assessment year 2009-10, the tribunal (supra)has decided the very issue in favour of the assessee. The Revenue submits as per ground No.2.6 that since the ship was not operated by the assessee itself but by West Asia Maritime Limited, so, it cannot be taken as entitled for the aforesaid benefit of tonnage tax. This argument, in our view, does not merit acceptance. After going through the relevant provision, it nowhere comes out that in case of a jointly owned ship by two or more companies, the same has to be operated specifically by each of the co-owners/ assessees. Therefore, this ground also fails. Needless to say, in assessment year 2009-10 the issue has been decided in assessee s favour. For the im ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
