DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. SALONA COTSPIN LTD., COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 483/CHNY/2015Status: DisposedITAT Chennai13 November 2015AY 2011-123 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 pendency of an SLP before the Supreme Court is not a reason to disregard a binding judgment of the jurisdictional High Court. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) was correct in following the High Court's decision.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80-IA. The Assessing Officer rejected it, but the CIT(Appeals) allowed it by following a Madras High Court judgment. The Revenue's only objection was that a Special Leave Petition (SLP) was pending before the Supreme Court against that judgment.

What were the issues?

Whether the pendency of an SLP before the Supreme Court justifies not following a binding High Court judgment for allowing a deduction under Section 80-IA.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80-IA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “D” BENCH, CHENNAI

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

For Respondent: Shri G. Baskar, Advocate
Hearing: 14.10.2015Pronounced: 13.11.2015

आदेश /O R D E R

PER N.R.S. GANESAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER:

1.

This appeal of the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore, dated 29.12.2014 and pertains to assessment year 2011-12.

2.

Dr. B. Nischal, the Ld. Departmental Representative, submitted that the only issue arises for consideration is with regard to deduction claimed by the assessee under Section 80-IA of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short 'the Act'). The CIT(Appeals) allowed the claim of the assessee on the basis of the judgment of the Madras High Court in Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. v.

ACIT (2010) (231 CTR 368). The only objection of the Revenue is that it has already filed a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court against the judgment of Madras High Court in Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (supra).

3.

We have heard Shri G. Baskar, the Ld.counsel for the assessee also. The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80- IA of the Act. However, the Assessing Officer rejected the same.

The CIT(Appeals), by following the judgment of Madras High Court in Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (supra), allowed the claim of the assessee. It is not the case of the Revenue that the judgment of Madras High Court in Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (supra) is not applicable to the case before us. The only objection of the Ld. D.R. is that an SLP is pending before the Supreme Court. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that mere pendency of SLP before the Supreme Court cannot be a reason not to follow the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court. In other words, the judgment of the Madras High Court is not only binding on this Tribunal but also binding on both the parties before this Tribunal. Therefore, the CIT(Appeals) has rightly followed the judgment of the jurisdictional High Court in Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. (supra). Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any reason to interfere with the order of the CIT(Appeals) and accordingly, the same is confirmed.

4.

In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.

Order pronounced on 13th November, 2015 at Chennai.

More judgments on Section 80-IA

All 612 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80-IA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →