TMI Blog2016 (8) TMI 1580X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s made on the basis of wastage delivered by their plants. No dividend has been distributed by the company so far. The object mentioned in the main and ancillary object are as per the line of the company act but it is not for profit earning. The Board of Director has to pass resolution to allow the outsider to get the services of the company. No director is outside from the members of Vapi Industrial Association. On the basis of decision of Hon ble Gujarat High Court in the case of Sports Club of Gujarat [ 1987 (10) TMI 21 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ] the assessee also has declared the interest income in return as taxable on fixed deposit with bank however, it was admitted that no outsider had provided the services of the company but the AO is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the depreciation amounting to Rs.1,35,89,900/-. 3. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) has erred in allowing the employees contribution to PF ESIC amounting to Rs.24,199/- as the payment was made after the expiry of due date. 3. Both the learned representatives reiterate their respective stand in the course of hearing before us. A perusal of the case file reveals that a co-ordinate bench of the tribunal in assessee s own case for preceding assessment year decided on 20.04.2012 has adjudicated the main issue of application of mutuality as under :- 19. We have perused the assessment order, order of the CIT(A), submission of the Authorized Representative a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... urt. The other grounds of appeal of the assessee like deduction u/s 80 IA, disallowance under head operating expenses and carry forward loss of earlier year has no meaning when principle of mutuality has been held in favour of the appellant. 3.1 The Revenue fails in pointing out any distinction on facts or law. Its only argument is that the same has not become final since its appeals are pending before the hon ble jurisdictional high court. We find the same to be no reason to adopt a different approach in the impugned assessment year. We affirm CIT(A) s findings under challenge in these facts and circumstances. Revenue s other substantive ground are rendered academic in view of our adjudication on mutuality principle in assessee s favou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
