TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (7) TMI 1233
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,25,030. 3. Facts of the case in nutshell are that the assessee company is engaged in development, operation and maintenance of Special Economic Zone. The return of income was filed on 30.9.2014 declaring total income of Rs. 97,69,303/-, which was processed under section 143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, the case of the assessee was selected for scrutiny assessment by issuance of notice under section 143(2) of the Act. During the course of assessment, the ld.AO noticed that the assessee has claimed deduction under section 80IAB of the Act which included profit on business of operation and maintenance of SEZ. The assessee was asked to justify its claim of deduction under section 80IAB. Assessee filed a detailed explanation in this behalf, and ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....entitled for deduction under section 80IAB. Dissatisfied with order of the ld.CIT(A) the Revenue is before the Tribunal with the present appeal. 4. Before us, while the ld.DR supported order of the AO, the ld.counsel for the assessee defended in support of order of the ld.CIT(A). He further submitted that continuously for the last two years, similar claim has been agitated both before the ld.first appellate authority and before the Tribunal, and the claim of deduction under section 80IAB has been allowed to the assessee. In this year also, claim is similar, facts are identical and therefore there is no reason to deviate from the view taken by the Tribunal on the issue on hand. The ld.CIT(A) has rightly appreciated the factum of earlier ye....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....;s order was challenged before the ITAT. In the course of appellate proceedings, the Id.AR contended that the issue is now squarely covered by the decision of Hon'ble ITAT in their orders pertaining to A.Ys.2009-10, 2010-11 & 2011-12. The department's appeal in all these years have been dismissed by the Hon'ble ITAT. I find that in ITA No.1464/Ahd/2012, A.Y.2009-10 order dated 21.07.2016, Hon'ble ITAT, Ahmedabad have dismissed the appeal of the department on this very issue. Relevant part of the said judgment is reproduced as below;- "24. From going through the proviso(2) of section 80IAB of the Act as referred above, which says that if the work of operation and maintenance of SEZ is transferred from one developer to a....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....edecessor in A.Y.2013-14. As the denial of deduction u/s.80IAB of the Act claims since A.Y.2009-10 have been allowed by the Hon'ble ITAT, respectfully following the Hon'ble ITAT's above judgment, it is held that appellant is entitled to deduction u/s.80IAB on Operations & Maintenance of SEZ. Accordingly, the disallowance made by the AO is deleted on this account. Ground No.1 of the appeal is allowed. 6. After going through orders of the ld.CIT(A) and the Tribunal, we find that the impugned issue is no more remain res integra with the Tribunal, because, the Tribunal on identical set of facts for the earlier years cited (supra) had allowed similar claim of the assessee. The Tribunal has discussed the issue at length both on facts....