9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (2) TMI 1905X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s and circumstances of the case and has thereby erred in sustaining disallowance of depreciation on R&D equipments @ 10% instead of 25% as claimed. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances of the case and has thereby erred in allowing deduction u/s 80IC of Income Tax Act, 1961 @ 30% as against 100% on account of substantial expansion undertaken in earlier years. 3. That the Ld. CIT(A)-II has failed to appreciate the facts and circumstances of the case and has thereby erred in not allowing deduction u/s 80IC of Income Act Act, 1961 on interest income and other income even though the same forms part of the business income. The action of the Ld. CIT(A)-II is unwarranted, unjustified and against the p ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... een 7.1.2003 upto 1.4.2012, should be entitled to benefit of Section 80-IC of the Act, for the period for which they were not entitled to the benefit of deduction under Section 80-IB. (b) Such of those units which have commenced production after 7.1.2003 and carried out substantial expansion prior to 1.4.2012, would also be entitled to benefit of deduction at different rates of percentage stipulated under Section 80-IC. (c) Substantial expansion cannot be confined to one expansion. As long as requirement of Section 80-IC(8)(ix) is met, there can be number of multiple substantial expansions. (d) Correspondingly, there can be more than one initial Assessment Years. (e) Within the window period of 7.1.2013 upto 1.4.2012, an underta ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... titlement and extent of deduction would be dependent upon interpretation of the relevant provisions." We, therefore, do not find any justification at this stage to give the Assessing officer a second innings to re-examine undisputed facts. 7. In view of the above discussion, the impugned order of the Ld. CIT(A) on this issue is set aside, and the AO is directed to grant to the assessees deduction at the rate of hundred percent of its eligible profits, as per the ruling of the jurisdictional High Court in this regard in the case of 'M/s Stovekraft India vs. Commissioner of Income Tax' (supra). In view of the above, ground No.2 of the appeals is allowed. 8. At this stage, Ld. Counsel for the assessee has submitted that the issue relatin ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
