DCIT, COIMBATORE vs. AMBIKA COTTON MILLS LTD., COIMBATORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1958/CHNY/2015Status: DisposedITAT Chennai11 December 2015AY 2012-137 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 a Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court does not justify deviating from a binding High Court judgment. Therefore, the CIT(A) was correct in following the High Court's decision.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the orders of the CIT(A) allowing deductions claimed by the assessees under Section 80-IA for windmills. The Assessing Officer had rejected the claims citing a pending Special Leave Petition against a Madras High Court judgment.

What were the issues?

Whether the pendency of a Special Leave Petition before the Supreme Court is a valid ground to deny a deduction when a High Court judgment in favor of the assessee exists.

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, ‘B’ BENCH, CHENNAI

Before: SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI & SHRI G. PAVAN KUMAR

For Respondent: Shri. R. Sidharth, Advocate

Heard together (11 matters)

I.T.A.No. 1958/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No.1959/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No. 1960/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No.1961/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No. 1964/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No. 1965/Mds/2015
I.T.A. No. 1966/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No. 1967/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No.1968/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No. 1971/Mds/2015
I.T.A.No.1972/Mds/2015

Read from the judgment's own cause title. This page is filed under one of them.

आदेश / O R D E R PER BENCH:

1.

All these appeals are filed by Revenue are directed against the different orders of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Coimbatore for the above assessment years. Since the issue in these appeals are common in nature, these appeals are clubbed, heard together, and disposed of by this common order for the sake of convenience. As far as in the case of M/s. SVA Syntex Pvt. Ltd is concerned, none appeared on behalf of the assessee, thus we dispose the case on merits after hearing the Departmental Representative .

We have heard both the sides and perused the material on 2. record. 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’’) in respect of windmills. The Assessing Officer rejected the claim of the assessees on the ground that the Department has filed a Special Leave Petition against the judgment of Madras High Court in Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P)

:- 6 -: 1959, 1960, 1961, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1971, 1972/Mds/2015 Ltd vs. ACIT 231 CTR 368. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) by following the judgment of Madras High Court allowed the claim of the assessees.

3.

Now the only contention of the Department before this Tribunal is that the Revenue has not accepted the judgment of Madras High Court and an appeal has already been filed along with Special Leave Petition and the same is pending before the Apex Court. This Tribunal is of the considered opinion that mere pendency of Special Leave Petition before the Apex Court cannot be a reason to take a different view. The judgment of Madras High Court is binding on all the authorities in the State of Tamil Nadu and Union Territory of Pondicherry. Therefore, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has rightly allowed the claim of the assessees by following the binding judgment of Madras High Court in Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P)

Ltd (supra). Therefore, this Tribunal do not find any infirmity in the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals).

:- 7 -: 1959, 1960, 1961, 1964, 1965, 1966, 1967, 1968, 1971, 1972/Mds/2015 In the result, the appeals of the Revenue are dismissed. 4.

Order pronounced on Tuesday, the 8th day of December, 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 →