DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE - 8, PUNE vs. M/S. ANUSUYA AUTOPRESS PARTS LTD, PUNE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 384/PUN/2018Status: DisposedITAT Pune12 November 2021AY 2013-144 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 upheld the deletion of the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer. It followed a previous decision for the assessment year 2012-13, where similar facts led to the acceptance of the 80IC deduction.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80IC for manufacturing automobile parts. The Assessing Officer disallowed this deduction, stating that the assessee had not fulfilled the required conditions, particularly regarding the purchase of old plant and machinery.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee fulfilled the conditions for claiming deduction under Section 80IC, specifically concerning the purchase of old plant and machinery.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IC

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PUNE BENCH, ‘B’ PUNE

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI C.M. GARG

For Appellant: Shri Kishor Phadke
For Respondent: Shri Piyush Kumar Singh Yadav

This appeal by the Revenue arises out of the order passed by the CIT(A)-6, Pune on 10-11-2017 in relation to the assessment year 2013-14.

2.

The only issue raised in this appeal is against the deletion of disallowance on account of deduction u/s.80IC of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter also called ‘the Act’) in spite of the AO’s opinion of the assessee having not fulfilled all the requisite conditions as envisaged in section 80IC(4) of the Act.

M/s. Anusuya Autopress Parts Ltd.,

3.

Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee is a manufacturer of Automobile and Auto parts. A return was filed declaring total income at Rs.8.25 crore. The assessee claimed deduction u/s.80IC at Rs.2,53,04,299/-. The Assessing Officer (AO) observed that the assessee purchased old plant and machinery in the same way in which it was done for the preceding year for which he rejected the claim of the deduction. He, therefore, disallowed the amount of deduction at Rs.2.53 crore. The ld. CIT(A) accepted the assessee’s claim following his own view for the assessment year 2012-13, against which the Revenue has come up in appeal before the Tribunal.

4.

We have heard both the sides and gone through the relevant material on record. It is seen that both the authorities below have followed their respective views as taken for the assessment year 2012-

13.

Such immediately preceding year came up for consideration before the Tribunal. Vide order dated 03-01-2019 in the Tribunal has echoed the view point of the ld. CIT(A) accepting the claim of deduction u/s.80IC. Both the sides are in agreement that the facts and circumstances for the instant year are M/s. Anusuya Autopress Parts Ltd., similar. Respectfully following the precedent, we uphold the impugned order on this score.

5.

In the result, the appeal is dismissed. Order pronounced in the Open Court on 12th November, 2021.

More judgments on Section 80IC

All 1,180 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IC →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →