DCIT CORPORATE CIRCLE 6(1), CHENNAI vs. SATTVA CFS & LOGISTICS PVT LTD., CHENNAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 2733/CHNY/2017Status: DisposedITAT Chennai31 May 2018AY 2009-104 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 held that the CIT(A) correctly followed a previous decision of the Tribunal in the assessee's own case for a different assessment year on an identical issue. Therefore, the order of the CIT(A) was upheld.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80IA for its container freight station and warehousing business. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim, assessing the income at Rs. 5,30,53,455/-. The CIT(A) allowed the deduction.

What were the issues?

Whether the deduction under Section 80IA for operating a container freight station and warehousing facilities is allowable. Whether a previous ITAT decision on an identical issue in the assessee's own case for a different AY is binding.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IA,Section 143(3),Section 147,Section 250(6)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI N.R.S. GANESAN & SHRI A.MOHAN ALANKAMONY

Hearing: 31.05.2018

आदेश / O R D E R

Per A. Mohan Alankamony, AM:- The appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order passed by the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-15, Chennai, dated 25.09.2017 in for the assessment year 2009-10 passed U/s.250(6) r.w.s. 143(3) & 147 of the Act.

2.

The only issue raised by the Revenue is that the Ld.CIT(A) has erred in directing the Ld.AO to allow deduction of Rs.5,30,35,455/- under Sub-Section 4(i) of Section 80IA of the Act.

3.

The brief facts of the case are that the assessee is a private limited company engaged in the business of operating container freight station and warehousing facilities, filed its return of income for the assessment year 2009-10 on 24.09.2009 declaring ‘Nil’ income after claiming deduction of Rs.5,80,96,012/- under Section 80IA of the Act. The case was selected for scrutiny through CASS and finally assessment order was passed U/s.143(3) r.w.s.

1.

147 of the Act on 30.12.2016 wherein the Ld.AO assessed the income of the assessee as Rs.5,30,53,455/- by disallowing the assessee’s claim of deduction U/s.80IA of the Act.

4.

At the outset the Ld.AR submitted that in the case of the assessee for the assessment year 2010-11, in vide order dated 01.01.2016, the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal had held the matter in favour of the assessee. He further submitted that the Ld.AO had disallowed the claim of deduction U/s.80IA of the Act for the relevant assessment

Revenue had contested the decision of the Tribunal in the assessee’s case for the assessment year 2010-11 before the Hon’ble High Court. It was also pointed out by the Ld.AR that in the case of M/s. AL Logistics Pvt. Ltd., on the identical issue, the Revenue had filed a SLP before the Hon’ble Supreme Court, disregarding those facts the Ld.AO held the issue against the assessee on the ground that the decision of the Tribunal and the Hon’ble Jurisdictional High Court has not reached finality, hence the same need not be followed as binding precedent. The Ld.AR further submitted that the Ld.CIT(A) following the decision of the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal on the identical issue in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2010-11, held the issue in favour of the assessee, against which the Revenue is on appeal before the Tribunal. It was therefore pleaded that the appeal of the Revenue is devoid of merits and may be dismissed. The Ld.DR could not controvert to the submission of the Ld.AR.

5.

We have heard the rival submissions and carefully perused the materials on record. It is not in disputed that on the identical issue in the assessee’s own case for the assessment year 2010- 11, the Chennai Bench of the Tribunal had decided the matter in favour of the assessee. In these circumstances we do not find it necessary to interfere with the order of the Ld.CIT(A) for the relevant assessment year because he has only followed the decision of the Tribunal. Accordingly we hereby uphold the order of the Ld.CIT(A).

6.

In the result appeal of the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on the 31st May, 2018 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 80IA

All 1,796 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →