TMI Blog2019 (11) TMI 1682X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... - ITA No. 2181/PUN/2017 - - - Dated:- 19-11-2019 - Shri D. Karunakara Rao, AM And Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, JM For the Assessee : Shri Nikhil Pathak. For the Revenue : Shri Pankaj Garg. ORDER PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee is against the order of the CIT(A)-2, Pune dated 20.07.2017 for the assessment year 2014-15. 2. The grounds raised by the assessee are as under :- 1] The learned CIT(A) erred in holding that the income on sale of Certified Emission Reduction / Carbon Credit was taxable as profits and gains of the assessee and thereby, erred in confirming the addition of ₹ 31,003 /- in the hands of the assessee. 2] The learned CIT (A) failed to appreciate ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . However, the revenue authorities rejected the assessee s contention and treated the same as taxable receipt. In this regard, ld. Counsel brought our attention to various decisions of the Tribunal where I am one of the party. Relying on the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court s judgement in the case of CIT vs. My Home Power Ltd. 46 taxmann.com 314 where the Hon ble High Court already decided the issue in favour of the assessee holding that the carbon credit receipt are the capital receipts. In this regard, ld. Counsel brought our attention to para 3 to 7 of this judgement (supra). Further, ld. Counsel for the assessee mentioned that the said view of the Hon ble Andhra Pradesh High Court was upheld by the Jurisdictional High Court in the case ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... arting from the judgment of Andhra Pradesh High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. My Home Power Ltd reported in (2014) 365 ITR 82 (AP) holding the receipts to be capital in nature. This was further elaborated by the Division Bench of Karnataka High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. Subhash Kabini Power Corporation Ltd. reported in (2016) 385 ITR 592 (Karn) and followed by lgc 2 of 3 (16) itxa- 1820.16ors.doc Allahabad High Court and Rajasthan High Court, (Allahabad High Court decision is in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax v/s. L Sugar Factory Pvt. Ltd reported in (2017) 392 ITR 568 (All)). 5 In view of such consistent view of the different High Courts in the country, we see no rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
