D.C.I.T CIR - 4,KOLKATA, KOLKATA vs. M/S MADHU JAYANTI INTERNATIONAL LTD, KOLKATA

PDF · subscribers
ITA 1888/KOL/2013Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata11 March 2016AY 2005-062 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the activity of blending tea is considered manufacturing, following a Special Bench decision in the assessee's own case. Consequently, the deduction under Section 10B was allowed.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the CIT(A)'s order allowing deduction under Section 10B to the assessee. The Assessing Officer had disallowed the deduction, holding that blending of tea is not manufacturing.

What were the issues?

Whether blending of tea constitutes 'manufacturing' for the purpose of claiming deduction under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10B,Section 10A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, KOLKATA BENCH “B” KOLKATA

Before: Shri N.V.Vasusdevan & Shri Waseem Ahmed

आदेश /O R D E R PER Waseem Ahmed, Accountant Member:-

1.

This appeal by the Revenue is against the order of Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-IV, Kolkata in appeal No.190/CIT(A)-IV/2008-09 dated 04.03.2013. Assessment was framed by ACIT, Circle-4, Kolkata u/s 143(3)/147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as ‘the Act’) vide his order dated 12.12.2008 for assessment year 2005-06. Grounds raised by Revenue are as under:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the ld. CIT(A) has justified in law in allowing the benefit of deduction u/s. 10B of the Act to the assessee when the assessee is engaged in blending of tea without manufacturing any new item.

2. Whether processing of tea can be considered as “manufacturing” for the purpose of section 10A/10B of the IT Act for this AY when the word “processing” has been deleted from the definition of manufacturing w.e.f. 01.04.2001.”

DCIT Cir-4, Kol. v. M/s Madhu Jayanti International Ltd. Page 2 Shri Akash Mansinka, Ld. Authorized Representative appearing on behalf of assessee and Shri Rajat Kr. Kureel, Ld. Departmental Representative appearing on behalf of Revenue.

2.

At the outset, it was observed that Assessing Officer has made disallowance of the deduction claimed u/s 10B of the Act on account of holding the activity of “blending of tea” as not manufacturing. However the ld. AR brought to our notice the decision of Special Bench of this Tribunal in assessee’s own case in dated 20.07.2012 for assessment year 2004-05 whereby it was held that the activity of blending of tea as manufacturing and consequently the deduction u/s. 10B of the Act was allowed in favour of assessee. On the contrary, Ld. DR vehemently relied on the orders of authorities below.

More judgments on Section 10B

All 1,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →