TMI Blog2011 (12) TMI 573X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... DR O R D E R PER SHRI A. K. GARODIA, AM:- This is assessee s appeal directed against the order of Ld. CIT(A) I, Surat dated 24.03.2009 for the assessment year 2005-06. 2. Ground No.1 is general. 3. Ground No.2 and 3 have interconnected issue which read as under: (2) On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subject, the Learned Commissioner of Income tax (Appeals-1), Surat, has erred in confirming the action of the Assessing Officer in rejecting the claim of the appellant for deduction of ₹ 4,92,6967-U/s.SOIB of the Act even though your appellant had satisfied all the conditions prescribed U/s.80IB of the Act. (3) On the facts and circumstances of the case as well as law on the subj ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... py of provisional S.S.I, registration. (ii) Copies of purchase bills of raw materials during March 2004. (iii) Copy of evidence to show that electricity connection was obtained in March. (iv) Details of contractor who carried out the electrical work, (v) Installation report of machinery. (vi) Copies of relevant proofs like bills, delivery challan and lorry receipt for installation of machinery. (vii) Credible evidence that workers were deployed and they were engaged in manufacturing activity. 2.1.2 In view of the above, the assessee stated that there was no violation of the conditions mentioned for deduction u/s.80IB. The factory licence was also issued by the Department on 12.10,2004 which shows that there was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... , the assessee carried the mater in appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but without success and now, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 6. It was the submission by the Ld. A.R. of the assessee that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the Tribunal decision in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2007-08 in I.T.A.No. 2764/Ahd/2010 dated 31.03.2011 and he submitted a copy of this tribunal decision. Ld. D.R. supported the orders of authorities below. 7. We have considered the rival submissions, perused the material on record and have gone through the orders of authorities below and the tribunal order in assessee s own case for the assessment year 2007-08. As per this tribunal order, it was held by the tribunal that ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e assessee has stated that it will not affect the taxable income because the increased income will be subject to deduction u/s.80IB. The assessee also relied on the decision of Zenith Rubber Plastic Works (35-TTJ-259- ITAT, Mumbai). 3.1.2 The A.O. did not accept this explanation and made the disallowance u/s.40(a)(ia) and stated that no deduction u/s.80IB can be given. 10. Being aggrieved the assessee carried the matter in appeal before Ld. CIT(A) but without success and now, the assessee is in further appeal before us. 11. It is submitted by the Ld. A.R. that the assessee has made payment of TDS along with interest u/s 201(1A) of the Income tax Act, 1961. It is also submitted that the payees have already included this amou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or deduction u/s 80-IB of the Act. Now, we go through the Tribunal decision cited by the Ld. A.R. having been rendered in the case of Ramesh Industries (supra). In that case, the tribunal has followed another tribunal decision rendered in the case of ITO Vs Chirag Plast in I.T.A.No. 2415/Ahd/2009 dated 23.10.2009 wherein, it was held that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s 80-IB in respect of increased income after making disallowance u/s 40(a)(ia). Since no contrary decision has been brought to our notice, we do not find any reason to take a contrary view and hence, by respectfully following these two tribunal decisions, we hold that for allowing deduction to the assessee u/s 80-IB, the increased income after making disallowance u/ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
