STADMED PRIVATE LIMITED,KOLKATA vs. DCIT, CIRCLE - 10, KOLKATA, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 122/KOL/2018Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata03 April 2019AY 2011-123 pages

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

AI SummaryAllowed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the subsidy received from the West Bengal Industrial Promotion Scheme is a capital receipt, following its own previous orders and the order of the Calcutta High Court. Consequently, the addition made by the lower authorities was set aside.

What were the facts?

The assessee received a subsidy from the West Bengal Industrial Promotion Scheme. The Assessing Officer and CIT(A) treated this subsidy as revenue receipt and made an addition to the assessee's income. The assessee contended it was a capital receipt.

What were the issues?

Whether the subsidy received by the assessee from the West Bengal Industrial Promotion Scheme is a capital receipt or a revenue receipt.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH: KOLKATA

Before: Shri P.M. Jagtap & Shri A. T. Varkey, JM]

Hearing: 06.02.2019Pronounced: 03.04.2019

ORDER Per Shri A.T.Varkey, JM This is an appeal preferred by the assessee against the order of Ld. CIT(A)-4, Kolkata dated 23.11.2017 for AY 2011-12.

2.

The sole issue involved in this appeal of assessee is against the action of Ld. CIT(A) in sustaining the addition of Rs.13,02,553/- made by AO overlooking the fact that it was the subsidy received by the assessee from West Bengal Industrial Promotion Scheme which is capital receipt and not revenue receipt as held by the AO/Ld CIT(A).

3.

At the outset itself, it was pointed out by the Ld. AR that the issue is covered in favour of assessee. So, after hearing rival submissions of the parties and after perusal of the material available on record, we note that the assessee has filed a paper book which, inter alia, contains copies of the orders of the Tribunal in assessee’s own case for AYs 1997-98, 1998-99, 1999-2000, 2001-02, 2002-03, 2003-04, 2005-06, 2006-07 (available in paper book pages12 to 49 of the paper book). Assessee’s paper book also contains orders of this Tribunal in the case of Rasoi Ltd. for AYs. 1995-96 to 1998-99 and several other cases (available in paper book pages 70 to 93). We note that similar case wherein the identical

Stadmed Private Limited, AY- 2011-12 issue was adjudicated by the coordinate bench of this Tribunal in M/s. Klar Sehen Pvt. Ltd. Vs. ITO, to 2071/Kol/2004 for AYs, 1996-97, 1997-98 and 2001-02 order dated 17.03.2005 (which is available at paper book page 93) in assessee’s favour which order of the Tribunal was upheld by the Hon’ble Calcutta High Court by its order dated 12.05.2008 in ITA No.315 of 2008 in GA No. 1451 of 2008, wherein it has been held as under: “….. Further, we have perused the order passed by the Tribunal. We have found that the Tribunal has extensively dealt with the matter including the facts, materials and evidence placed before the Tribunal for adjudication. We do not find any reason to interfere with the order so passed by the learned Tribunal nor the order so passed by the learned Tribunal suffers from any legal infirmity nor we find that any substantial question of law is involved in this appeal. Hence, we dismiss the application and the appeal without any order as to costs.”

4.

There being no change in the facts and circumstances of the assessee’s case for the year under consideration than those already decided by the coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s favour, we see no reason to differ from the view earlier taken in the case of the assessee. Respectfully following the aforesaid orders of the Tribunal, we decide the issue in favour of the assessee and set aside the actions of the lower authorities and allow the claim of the assessee that subsidy in question received from West Bengal Industrial Promotion Scheme is capital in nature and consequently order deletion of the addition on this issue. Appeal of assessee is allowed.

5.

In the result, appeal of assessee is allowed.

Order is pronounced in the open court on 3rd April, 2019 Sd/- Sd/- (P. M. Jagtap) (Aby. T. Varkey) Vice President Judicial Member Dated : 3rd April, 2019 Jd.(Sr.P.S.) Stadmed Private Limited, AY- 2011-12 Copy of the order forwarded to:

1.

Appellant – M/s. Stadmed Private Limited, 14/A, Manoharpukur Road, Kolkata-700 026. Respondent – DCIT, Circle-10, Kolkata. 2 3. CIT(A)-4, Kolkata (sent through e-mail) CIT- , Kolkata. 4.

5. DR, ITAT, Kolkata. (sent through e-mail)

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →