Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (8) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (8) TMI 104 - GUJARAT HIGH COURTDisallowance of deduction claimed u/s.80IA - Held that:- From the records it is borne out that the unit is registered with the Central Excise Department and Sales Tax Authority which charges excise duty on the goods dispatched from the undertaking at Daman. The Excise Register maintained by the assessee is being verified by the Central Excise and Customs Department. Learned advocate for the revenue could not rebut this finding. Moreover, from the report of the Assessing Officer himself, there were more than 10 persons working in Daman. We have also gone through the report dated 23.06.2003 addressed by the ITO Ward-2, Mehsana that the assessee had purchased the diesel for the power requirement for the industrial undertaking. We have gone through the orders passed by the CIT(A) as well as the Tribunal who have given detailed reasons for deleting the disallowance. The assessee was allowed such deduction in the earlier years and no action u/s 263 or 147 was taken against the assessee. Therefore we do not see any reason for interference so far as the first question is concerned. With regard to the question regarding disallowance of salary, we are of the view that the Tribunal has rightly proceeded on the footing that since at the time of inspection it was found that the employees were actually engaged in the factory at Daman and merely that the assessee has not employed employees regularly it cannot be the basis of disallowing salary. In view of the evidence in the form of salary register and the statements of employees and the partner etc., the CIT(A) and the Tribunal has rightly deleted the disallowance. We do not find any infirmity in the impugned orders passed by the Tribunal.- Decided in favour of the assessee
|