C.I.T., II, JODHPUR vs. M/S P.T.M. INDUSTRIES

PDF · subscribers
ITA/52/2013HC RajasthanRJHC01019745201317 March 2015Author: GOVIND MATHUR,JAISHREE THAKUR2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the argument advanced by the Revenue lacked merit. It found that both the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had thoroughly examined the entire issue, taking into consideration all relevant facts. The Court stated that such findings of fact do not warrant interference in appellate jurisdiction. Consequently, the Court concluded that the appeal did not involve any substantial question of law. The appeal was dismissed. No issue was expressly left undecided.

What were the facts?

For assessment year 2005-06, the assessing officer initially allowed a deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the respondent-assessee, M/s P T M Industries. The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jodhpur, exercising powers under Section 263, set aside the assessment order and directed reconsideration. Subsequently, the assessing officer disallowed the Section 80IB deduction. The assessee appealed to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), who allowed the appeal on January 17, 2011. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal affirmed this decision on December 20, 2012. The Revenue (Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jodhpur) has filed this appeal against the Tribunal's order.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in allowing the deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, to the assessee, despite the assessee consuming meagre electricity for a huge production, which raises doubts about the claim? Assessee's Contentions: Not recorded in the judgment. Revenue's Contentions: The Revenue argued that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) and the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal failed to appreciate that the assessee consumed a meagre amount of electricity but reported huge production, which casts doubt on the validity of the Section 80IB deduction claim.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IB,Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

[1] IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE FOR RAJASTHAN AT JODHPUR J U D G M E N T D.B. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.52/2013 Commissioner of Income Tax–II, Jodhpur Versus M/s P T M Industries, Balotra Date of Judgment :: 17.03.2015 PRESENT HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE GOVIND MATHUR HON'BLE MISS JUSTICE JAISHREE THAKUR Mr. Sunil Bhandari for the appellant BY THE COURT : While making assessment as per the provisions of Section 143 (3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, 'the Act of 1961'), the assessing officer for the assessment year 2005-06 allowed deduction as per Section 80IB of the Act of 1961 to the respondent-assessee. The Commissioner of Income Tax-II, Jodhpur while exercising powers under Section 263 of the Act of 1961 set aside the order of assessment and directed the assessment officer to reconsider the entire issue by taking into consideration several points mentioned in the order passed by him. The assessing officer while making the assessment afresh disallowed deductions as per the provisions of Section 80IB of the Act of 1961. The assessee assailed validity of the same by [2] way of filing an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), that came to be allowed on 17.01.2011. The order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) came to be affirmed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Jodhpur Bench, Jodhpur vide the order dated 20.12.2012. Being aggrieved by the same, this appeal is preferred by the Revenue. The argument advanced by learned counsel for the appellant is that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal failed to appreciate that the assessee consumed a meagre electricity, but has given a huge production and therefore, that creates doubts about his claim about deductions as per Section 80IB of the Act of 1961. We do not find any merit in the argument advanced. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal has examined the entire issue in detail by taking into consideration all the relevant facts. Such finding of fact does not require interference in the appellate juri iction. The appeal does not involve any substantial question of law. Dismissed, accordingly. [JAISHREE THAKUR], J. [GOVIND MATHUR], J. Pramod

More judgments on Section 80IB

All 1,094 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →