DCIT CEN CIR 6, MUMBAI vs. CHEMBUR TRADING CORPORATION, MUMBAI

2014 in question. Assessing Officer did not allow the deduction u/s.80-IB(10) of the Act in respect to the appellant’s firm project at Anik Village, Chembur amounting to Rs.5,77,36,674/-. While disallowing the said amount the Assessing Officer relied upon the earlier assessment order for the A.Y.2008-09 wherein the claim of the assessee was declined. In appeal against the order for the A.Y.2008-09 the learned CIT(A) allowed the deduction u/s. u/s.80-IB(10) of the Act . The revenue filed the appeal but the appeal of the revenue was dismissed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai bench and confirmed the finding of learned CIT(A). In the instant case the learned CIT(A) allowed the appeal of the assessee on the basis of order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.4517/Mum/2011 for A.Y.2008-09 in the assessee’s own case. The ground which has been taken by the Assessing Officer for disallowance the deduction u/s.80-IB(10) is nowhere in existence now. In view of the decision of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai bench in ITA No.4517/Mum/2011 for A.Y.2008-09 in the assessee’s own case, we are of the view that the matter of controversy is the quite same and fully covered by the above said order. Nothing incriminating material is on record to which it can be assumed that the appellant is not entitled for the deduction u/s.80-IB(10). Since the present case is fully covered by the ITA No.4517/Mum/2011 for A.Y.2008-09 in the assessee’s own case, therefore we are of the view that the learned CIT(A) has passed the judgment judiciously

In the result, appeal of the Revenue is hereby dismissed.

""यथ" / The Respondent. 3. आयकर आयु"त(अपील) / The CIT(A)- 4. आयकर आयु"त / CIT

"वभागीय ""त"न"ध, आयकर अपील"य अ"धकरण, मुंबई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai 6. गाड" फाईल / Guard file. आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, स"या"पत ""त //// उप/सहायक पंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.