NIRMAL INDUSTRIAL CONTROLS PVT. LTD.,MUMBAI vs. ACIT - 10(3), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 5500/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai25 April 2017AY 2006-074 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal directed the Assessing Officer to examine the new evidence submitted by the assessee regarding incentive schemes and decide the claim afresh. The assessee was given an opportunity to furnish further evidence.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed an order confirming the addition of various set-offs (service tax, excise duty, sales tax) and income from service/labour charges for the purpose of deduction under Section 80IB. During the hearing, the assessee produced new documentary evidence related to incentive schemes.

What were the issues?

Whether the set-offs and income claimed by the assessee are eligible for deduction under Section 80IB, and the admissibility of new evidence presented during the appeal.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IB

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, MUMBAI BENCHES “B”, MUMBAI

Before: Shri Joginder Singh, & Shri Ramit Kochar

For Appellant: Shri Suman Kumar-D.R
Hearing: 21/04/2017

आदेश / O R D E R

Per Joginder Singh, Judicial Member

1.

The assessee is aggrieved by the impugned order dated 12/07/2013 of the Ld. First Appellate Authority, Mumbai, confirming the addition of service tax set off, excise duty set off, sales tax set off, income from service charges and labour charges for the purposes of deduction u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter the Act).

2.

During hearing of this appeal, the assessee was directed to produce the documentary evidence explaining the basis of claiming such set off by the assessee. The assessee on the next date, i.e. 21/04/2017 produced the copy of package scheme of incentives 1993 (pages 1 to 22 of the paper book), eligibility certificate for grant of special capital incentive under PSI-93(pages 23 to 27) and certificate of entitlement for Sales Tax incentive under the package part (page-28 to 30 of the paper book). The incentive schemes was claimed to be for a period from 01/06/1997 to 31/03/2005. The Ld. DR, Shri Suman Kumar, contended that this is new evidence, needs to be examined by the Ld. Assessing Officer. The ld. counsel for the assessee had also not objection if all the documents are examined by the Ld. Assessing Officer.

2.1 We have considered the rival submissions and perused the material available on record. Considering the totality of facts, we find that new documents in the form of package scheme of incentives, eligibility certificate for grant of special capital incentive under PSI-93, certificate for entitlement for sales tax incentive, were filed by the assessee. The assessee is directed to explain the basis of its claim. The Ld. Assessing Officer is, therefore, directed to examine the claim of the assessee and decide afresh in accordance with law. The assessee be given opportunity of being heard with further liberty to furnish evidence, if any, in support of its claim, thus, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

Finally, the appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.

This order was pronounced in the open in the presence of ld. representatives from both sides at the conclusion of the hearing on 21/04/2017.

Sd/- Sd/-

(Ramit Kochar) (Joginder Singh) लेखा सद�य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER �या�यक सद�य /JUDICIAL MEMBER मुंबई Mumbai; �दनांक Dated : 25/04/2017 f{x~{tÜ? P.S/.�न.स. आदेश क� ��त�ल�प अ�े�षत/Copy of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ� / The Appellant 2. ��यथ� / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु�त(अपील) / The CIT, Mumbai. 4. आयकर आयु�त / CIT(A)- , Mumbai 5. �वभागीय ��त�न�ध, आयकर अपील�य अ�धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai

More judgments on Section 80IB

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

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →