TMI Blog2022 (6) TMI 808X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to hold that if the nursery is maintained independently without resorting to basis operations of law then the income from such nursery would not be agriculture income and would be liable to be included in total income. This circular will not have any effect on the assessee s case as on facts, the Commissioner Appeals has noted the submission of the assessee that in order to cultivate the seeds the assessee engages in the activities of preparing of land, levelling, preparation of beds, sowing of seeds, planting etc. and after a certain stage the best responsive plant is earmarked as the mother seed. Therefore, de hors the circular issued by CBDT, the conclusion arrived at by the Tribunal, affirming the view taken by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeal), cannot be faulted. Deduction under Section 80IA - two captive power under takings at Bhadrachallam - As per AO assessee was not entitled to the aforesaid deduction since it had supplied power only to the paper undertakings belonging to the assessee itself and not to any outsider? - HELD THAT:- It is not in dispute that the said question is covered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in assessee s own case for th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ourt on the very same issue. But, however, we note that the tax implication on the said issue is far lesser than the threshold limit fixed by CBDT for filing of the appeal. Since all four substantial question of law have been answered against the revenue the solitary question which remains is with regard to the claim for deduction under Section 43B. We have perused the assessment year and we find that the disallowance on the said head is Rs.4,06,052/-. This being below the threshold limit fixed by the CBDT for pursuing the appeal, the appeal fixed by the revenue on this ground has to be dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. Consequently, the substantial question of law has to be left open. - ITAT NO. 150 OF 2014 IA NO:GA/2/2014[OLD NO:GA/2966/2014] - - - Dated:- 14-6-2022 - THE HON BLE MR. JUSTICE T.S. SIVAGNANAM AND THE HON BLE MR.JUSTICE HIRANMAY BHATTACHARYYA I Mr. Om Narain Rai, Advocate ...for the appellant Mr. J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, Advocate ...for the respondent JUDGMENT ( Judgment of the Court was delivered by T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) (T.S. SIVAGNANAM, J.) : - This appeal by the revenue filed under Section 260A o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as not claimed in the return of assessment year 2007-08? We have heard Mr. Om Narayan Rai, learned standing counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr. J.P. Khaitan, learned Senior Counsel, assisted by Ms. Nilanjana Banerjee Pal, learned Advocate for the assessee. We need not labour much to answer the substantial question of law framed for consideration on account of certain earlier decisions in the assessee s own case. So far as substantial question of law Nos. 1 and 2 are concerned the issue stands squarely covered by the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Soundarya Nursery [241 ITR 530] as well as the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Green Gold Tree Farmers (P) Ltd [2008] 299 ITR 262. That apart we note that in assessee s own case for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2006- 07 these questions were answered in favour of the assessee. Aggrieved by the same, the revenue had preferred appeal before this Court in ITA No. 173 of 2011 which was dismissed by judgment dated 22.12.2015. On reading of the said judgment it is not clear as to whether the said appeal relates to the assessment year 2005-06 or 2006-07 yet the legal issues having been settled, the order pa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t undertaking had not been set up the other business of the assessee would naturally have depended for its demand in its entirety upon the supply by the Andhra Pradesh State Electricity Board. Shortage of power throughout the country is a well-known phenomenon. The overall shortage of power to the extent of the power generated by the undertaking has, therefore, been reduced. 6. We are, as such, unable to hold that the benefit under Section 80IA is not available to the assessee because the power generated was consumed at home or by other business of the assessee. It is now well-settled that a statute granting incentives for promoting growth and development should be construed liberally so as to advance the objective of the provision and not to frustrate it. Thus following the aforementioned decision substantial question of law no. 3 is answered against the revenue. In so far as the substantial question of law No. 4 is concerned CITA reversed the order passed by the assessing officer having found that the assessee was an eligible undertaking and entitled to the benefit of Section 80IC which is a special provision in respect of certain undertakings or industries in cert ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bstantial question of law No. 4 is answered against the revenue. This leaves us with only substantial question of law No. 5 which pertains to claim made by the assessee for deduction under Section 43B of the Act being amount of employees contribution towards provident fund/employees State insurance paid after the expiry of due date prescribed under the relevant statute even though the same was not claimed in the return for the assessment year 2007-08. We are conscious of the fact that certain appeals have been admitted by this Court on the very same issue. But, however, we note that the tax implication on the said issue is far lesser than the threshold limit fixed by CBDT for filing of the appeal. Since all four substantial question of law have been answered against the revenue the solitary question which remains is with regard to the claim for deduction under Section 43B. We have perused the assessment year and we find that the disallowance on the said head is Rs.4,06,052/-. This being below the threshold limit fixed by the CBDT for pursuing the appeal, the appeal fixed by the revenue on this ground has to be dismissed on the ground of low tax effect. Consequently, the substa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
