ACIT, Circle-31, Kolkata vs. M/S Agro Life Science Corporation, Kolkata
In the result, Revenue’s appeal stands dismissed
ITA 1863/KOL/2016[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata04 Apr 2018AY 2013-14
Bench: Shri N.V.Vasudevan & Shri Waseem Ahmedassessment Year :2013-14 Acit, Circle-31, V/S. M/S Agro Life Science 10B, Middleton Row, Corporation, Fmc Fortuna 4Th Floor, Kolkata-71 Building, 234/3A, A.J.C. Bose Road, Kolkata-20 [Pan No.Aakfa 5781 A] .. अपीलाथ" /Appellant ""यथ"/Respondent Shri Arindam Bhattacharjee, Addl. Cit-Dr अपीलाथ" क" ओर से/By Appellant Shri Sanjeev Kadel, Fca ""यथ" क" ओर से/By Respondent 08-02-2018 सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing 04-04-2018 घोषणा क" तार"ख/Date Of Pronouncement आदेश /O R D E R Per Waseem Ahmed:- This Appeal By The Revenue Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals)-9, Kolkata Dated 21.06.2016. Assessment Was Framed By Acit, Circle-31, Kolkata U/S 143(3) Of The Income Tax Act, 1961 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’) Vide His Order Dated 28.02.2016 For Assessment Year 2013-14. The Grounds Of Appeal Raised By The Revenue Reads As Follows:- “1.”That On The Facts & In The Circumstances Of The Case & In Law, The Ld. Cit(Appeals) Has Erred In Allowing The Amount Of Rs.2,34,84,055/- & Rs.82,192/- On Account Of Excise Duty Refund & Interest Subsidy Respectively As Capital Receipt.” 2. That The Ld. Cit(Appeals)Has Not Taken Into Account The Verdict In The Following Cases: A) Sehanay Steel Pres Works Ltd. & Ors Vs. Cit (1997) 228 Itr 253 B) Kesoram Industries & Cotton Ltd. Vs. Cit (1991) 191 Itr 518
Section 143(3)
…ree Balaji Alloys wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court held as under:- “The issue raised in these appeals is covered against the Revenue by the decision of this Court in “Commissioner of Income Tax, Madras Vs. Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd.”, reported in (2008) 9 SCC 337, or in the alternate, in “Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/s Meghalaya Steels Ltd.”, reported in (2016) 3 SCALE 192. The appeals are, therefore, dismissed.” 1863/Kol/2016 A.Y. 2013-14 ACIT Cir-31,Kol. Vs. M/s Agro Life Science Corpn. Page 5 In view of the above proposition, we hold that the incentives received by assessee in the form of excise dut…
