THE DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX CIRCLE-1(1)(1), AHMEDABAD vs. M/S. ANIL BIOPLUS LIMITED, AHMEDABAD

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1763/AHD/2016Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad20 February 2020AY 2012-133 pages

In favour of the assessee: the Revenue's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal upheld the decision of the CIT(A) which had allowed the deduction under Section 80JJA. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) had dealt with the issue objectively and the Revenue had failed to rebut the findings.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the deletion of an addition made on account of disallowance of deduction under Section 80JJA. The assessee claimed deduction on profits from processing biodegradable waste into biofeeds.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 80JJA for processing biodegradable waste into biofeeds, and whether the purchases made qualify as biodegradable waste.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80JJA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, AHMEDABAD

Before: SHRI PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA & SHRI MAHAVIR PRASAD

For Appellant: Shri Vinod Tanwani, Sr.DR

The captioned appeal has been filed at the instance of the Revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Ahmedabad (‘CIT(A)’ in short), dated 26.04.2016 arising in the assessment order dated 24.02.2015 passed by the Assessing Officer (AO) under s. 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) concerning AY 2012-13.

2.

The Grounds of appeal filed by the Revenue reads as under: [DCIT vs. Anil Bioplus Ltd.] A.Y. 2012-13 - 2 - “(1) That the ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in deleting the addition of Rs.3,11,98,757/- made on account of disallowance of deduction u/s 80JJA of the I.T. Act. (2) That the ld.CIT(A) has substantially erred in not appreciating the facts of the case that the assessee had purchased Feed EZ Plus, Feed, Barn, Maize and Gluten, which were not “Bio-degradable Waste” within the meaning of Section 80JJA. (3) That the ld. CIT(A) has substantially erred in not considering the facts of the case that the assessee had not furnished any details like copy of bills, delivery challan etc. in order to prove the genuineness of purchase.”

3.

Identical dispute has been raised in the case of assessee in AY 2011- 12 in order dated 30.01.2020 as well. The co- ordinate bench of Tribunal after taking detailed note of facts and circumstances of the case, has adjudicated the issue in favour of assessee and against the Revenue. The relevant operative para of the order of the Tribunal in ITA No. 902/Ahd/2016 (supra) reads as under:

“9. We have carefully perused the assessment order of the AO and appellate order of CIT(A). The claim of deduction under s.80JJA of the Act on processing of biodegradable waste for generation of biofeeds (biological agents) is in question. The CIT(A) has found merit in the claim of deduction on principles. The CIT(A) has taken note of the submissions of the assessee towards process of production of biofeeds in the nature of biological agents from biodegradable waste, ingredients purchased for processing and treating waste, details of machinery used in production, details of purchase and sale made from various parties etc. The CIT(A) found merit in the case of the assessee for eligibility of deduction under s.80JJA of the Act from on profits arising from activity of collection and processing of biodegradable waste in order to generate/manufacture biofeeds/biological agents which are essentially nutrition booster derived by a combination of various biological processes for the use in Animal Healthcare Industry. As per process adopted, unwanted waste are further treated through a series of biological process with the help of biotechnology to produce biofeeds which are rich in energy values. Biofeeds are stated to help in improving the digestion in animals and poultry and the biological agents present in biofeeds are stated to be used to replace chemical based antibiotics in animal and poultry. On these facts, the CIT(A) has accepted the claim of the assessee under s. 80JJA of the Act on first principle but re-allocated a part of expenditure as considered attributable to the activity derived from the business of collecting and processing or treating biodegradable waste for production of biological agents. Owing to reallocation of expenses, the CIT(A) restricted the claim to the extent of Rs.1.54 Crores as against the claim of the assessee amounting to Rs.1.91 Crore. We find considerable substance in the process of reasoning adopted by the CIT(A) while concluding the [DCIT vs. Anil Bioplus Ltd.] A.Y. 2012-13 - 3 - issue in favour of the assessee. The CIT(A), in our view, has dealt with the issue objectively and hence does not warrant interference. The Revenue has failed to rebut the findings of the CIT(A) in any assertive manner. We thus decline to interfere.”

4.

The issue is thus no longer res integra and already adjudicated in favour of the assessee in AY 2011-12 as well. In consonance with the view already taken in the identical facts, we decline to interfere with the order of the CIT(A).

5.

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

This Order pronounced in Open Court on 20/02/2020

Sd/- Sd/- (MAHAVIR PRASAD) (PRADIP KUMAR KEDIA) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER Ahmedabad: Dated 20/02/2020 True Copy S. K. SINHA आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत / Copy of Order Forwarded to:- 1. राज�व / Revenue 2. आवेदक / Assessee 3. संबं�धत आयकर आयु�त / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु�त- अपील / CIT (A) 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad 6. गाड� फाइल / Guard file. By order/आदेश से,

उप/सहायक पंजीकार आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, अहमदाबाद ।

More judgments on Section 80JJA

All 81 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80JJA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →