Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2014 (3) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 108 - HC - Income TaxProcess amounts to manufacture or not - Whether the process of jewellery making through job work in the manner undertaken by the appellant amounts to manufacturing for the purpose of Section 10A Held that:- The decision in CIT v. Lovlesh Jain [2011 (12) TMI 93 - DELHI HIGH COURT] followed the activity amounts to manufacturing Decided against Revenue. Claim of purchase of machinery and equipments Held that:- The AO had queried the appellant as to whether transfer of any old machinery had taken place at the time of setting up of unit and he made an adverse comment in respect of non-production of such materials - whether the machinery was new or not was an aspect which the CIT (A) was within its rights to enquire into - he did so by invoking the Rule 46A of the Income Tax Act - The assessing authority was afforded an opportunity and a remand report appears to have been called for thus, finding of fact concurrently recorded cannot be gone into there was no question of law arises Decided against Revenue. Entitlement for benefit of section 10A of the Act Held that:- The question formulated is limited to the findings of the CIT (A) and the Tribunal with respect to the setting aside of the disallowance - The ground of appeal urged before the Tribunal did not disclose that the Revenue had ever argued that the claim for deduction of these amounts (towards fabrication and designing charges) itself evidenced that the appellant did not carry on any manufacturing activity - The Tribunal noted that it might have been more appropriate for the CIT (A) to have forwarded the bills and vouchers for the examination of the AO it was in its discretion to make any directions towards remand - the approach of the CIT (A) confirmed by the ITAT cannot be considered perverse as to warrant interference under Section 260A Decided against Revenue.
|