9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (10) TMI 248X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the case, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts as well as on law in allowing exemption u/s 10B amounting to Rs. 10,02,17,979/- to the assessee when the assessee was not engaged in manufacturing any article or thing. 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified has erred both on facts as well as on law in allowing exemption u/s 10B when the assessee was engaged only in the business process of removing impurities from lower grade chrome ores through and benefication process which did not bring out any new article or thing with a different chemical composition. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Ld. CIT(A) was not justified in allowing exemption u/s 10B to the assessee rel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e's case as manufacturing activity or not and for that matter there is a complete business by the Assessing Officer in dealing High School Chemistry with the case of the assessee which is nothing but an arbitrary act and does not have any relevance with the provisions of the Act vis-a-vis the decision pronounced by the various Courts and Tribunals. Accordingly, the AO made various disallowances after assessing the total income of the assessee at Rs. 12,41,38,110/-. 4. Feeling aggrieved the assessee appealed before the CIT(A) and the CIT(A) after considering the facts and circumstances of the case and also the submissions of the assessee partly allowed the appeal of the assessee. 5. Now, the Revenue is in appeal before the Income Tax Appel ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... squarely applicable to the case of the assessee on the subject favouring the claim of the assessee that the production of chrome concentrate is a manufacturing activity and, therefore, the assessee is entitled to deduction u/s.10B of the Act. 8. After hearing the submissions of both the sides and perusing the entire material available on record, we find that the issue involved in the present case of the assessee has already been decided by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for immediately preceding assessment i.e. A.Y.2008-2009 in ITA No.125/CTK/2012, order dated 14.02.2013, wherein the Tribunal has observed as under :- 7. We have heard the rival parties and perused the material available on record. On our care ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as the manufacturing from the exempted production of goods dealt with by the assessee has to be scrupulously followed. On a specific query by the Bench whether the assessee has excise duty record which identify the amount of stock held and the amount of stock after the manufacturing is duly acknowledged by the Excise Department authorities, the learned Counsel of the assessee prayed for a remand to the Assessing Officer before whom such records will be produced to establish that the manufacturing did occur as per the process submitted before the assessing authorities insofar as not a single grain of chrome has been sold without manufacturing not in the knowledge of the Excise Department. Therefore, we are of the considered view that the iss ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... issue, are allowed for statistical purposes. 10. In the cross objection the assessee has taken the following grounds :- 1. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) has rightly held that the production of chrome concentrate by the appellant is a manufacturing activity, hence, the appellant is entitled for deduction u/s.10B of the Act. 2. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed the entire claim of Rs. 1,36,61,510/- under transport expenses while no expenditure in violation of Section 40A(3) of the Income Tax Act,1961 was made. 3. For that on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the learned CIT(A) ought to have allowed entire claim ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Act. 14. After hearing the submissions of both the sides and perusing the entire material available on record, we find that the issue involved in the present case has already been decided by the coordinate bench of the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the A.Y.2009-2010 in ITA No.214/CTK/2014, vide order dated 29.05.2015, wherein the Tribunal has already been decided in favour of the assessee, therefore, the ground Nos.2&3 raised by the assessee in its cross objection, have become infructuous as has already been settled. Thus, ground No.4 raised by the Revenue in its appeal and grounds No.2 & 3 raised by the assessee in its cross objection are dismissed. 15. In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
