9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 215X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in law, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in treating that the income related to job works eligible for deduction U/s 80IB holding that the job work, the process of stitching, is an integral part of the whole chain of manufacturing process in contradiction to the view held by the Assessing Officer. 3. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, whether the term manufacturer under section 80IB would include manufacturing activity being carried out outsourced to another party. 4. The learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is erred in law as well as in facts by giving relief to the assessee holding that the process of stitching is an integral part of the whole chain of manufacturing process and the pr ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... med and allowed in the original assessment was excessive. The assessment u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 147 was completed vide order dated 18.11.2010. In the said reassessment order, the Assessing Officer recomputed deduction u/s 80IB of the I.T.Act by excluding job work from the turnover and proportionately allowing the claim of deduction. The relevant finding of the Assessing Officer reads as follow:- "The assessee is in the business of manufacture of PVC slippers. The assessee had claimed a sum of Rs. 6,17,708 as deduction under section 80IB. Though the assessee is basically eligible for the deduction a mistake had crept in the calculation of the deduction. As per the details available the assessee had incurred Rs. 6,67,507 towards "job work" which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... B. The ground is allowed." 6. Aggrieved by the order of the CIT(A), the Revenue has preferred this appeal before the Tribunal. The learned Departmental Representative relied on the ground raised and also the judgments of the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court in the case of R And P Exports v. CIT [(2005) 279 ITR 536 (All.)] and the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Daman Computers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO [Income Tax Appeal No.1 of 2008 - judgment dated 10th August, 2018]. The learned AR, on the other hand, has filed a brief written submission relying on the order of the Delhi Benches of the Tribunal in the case of Rajiv Bhatnagar v. DCIT [ITA No.1026/Del/2011 - order dated 17th December, 2012]. 7. I have heard the learned Departmental Represe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... High Court held that there was no employer / employee relationship between the assessee and the Artisans. Therefore, it was concluded by the Hon'ble Allahabad High Court that Artisans not being employees of the assessee, does not satisfy the condition mentioned u/s 80HH(2)(iv) of the I.T.Act. 7.2 The judgment of the Hon'ble Bombay High Court in the case of Daman Computers Pvt. Ltd. v. ITO (supra), is also distinguishable on facts. In the case considered by the Hon'ble Mumbai High Court there was a categorical finding that the job work undertaken by the third person was totally distinct and the assessee in that case did not retain its control over the manufacture / job work undertaken by the third party, whereas in this case, job work was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
