|
II. Direct Taxes Case Laws:
1. M/s Tirupati LPG Industries Ltd. Vs. Joint CIT, I.T.A. No. 2786/Del/2013, Date of Order: 10.02.2016, ITAT- Delhi
Whether
deduction u/s 80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be claimed more
than once where the assessee undertakes ‘substantial expansion’ of
installed capacity of the unit again?
Held_ Yes
The
company is engaged in manufacturing and selling of new LPG cylinders and
conductor wires. The assessee completed substantial expansion of
installed capacity of the unit during the A.Y. 2004-05 and claimed
deduction u/s 80 IC of the Act at 100% of profits for first 5 years from
A.Y. 2004-05 to A.Y. 2008-09. Thereafter assessee undertook substantial
expansion for the second time which was completed in A.Y. 2009-10. The
assessee again claimed 100% deduction considering A.Y. 2009-10 as the
initial Assessment year. The AO contended that assessee is eligible for
only 30% deduction for the period from A.Y. 2009-10 to A.Y. 2013-14
being sixth to tenth assessment year in respect of substantial expansion
undertaken in A.Y. 2004-05.
The
hon’ble ITAT in assessee’s own case for A.Y. 2009-10, held that a unit
can undertake any number of substantial expansions, in the absence of
any specific restriction in the Section. There is no suggestion in the
language of the section that incentive u/s 80IC of the Act is not
available if the assessee substantially expands for a second or third
time. Substantial expansion requires additional investment and results
in higher production, employment etc. Industrialists have to be
encouraged to undertake substantial expansion. The section recognizes
this fact and provides for an incentive, if an assessee undertakes
“substantial expansion”.
The
Hon’ble ITAT following the same view held that assessee is again
eligible for 100% deduction for the period from A.Y. 2009-10 to A.Y.
2013-14 being first five years of second substantial expansion,
beginning from A.Y. 2009-10 i.e. the initial assessment year.
Thus, the appeal is allowed.
(Please click here for judgment)
2. DCIT Vs. M/s. Sam India Abhimanyu Housing, I.T.A. No. 1257/Del/2015, Date of order: 05.02.2016, ITAT- Delhi
Whether
penalty u/s 271AAA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 can be imposed on an
assessee in the absence of Search & Seizure proceedings u/s 132 of
the Act in the assessee’s own case and where only Survey proceedings u/s
133A of the Act has been conducted on the assessee?
Held_No
In
brief, the assessee was engaged in the business of developing the
housing projects. Search u/s 132 of the Act was conducted on Sam India
Builtwell Private Limited & Others wherein some documents relating
to the assessee were found. Assessee offered lump-sum amount in respect
of cash notings appearing on such documents/loose papers with a view to
buy peace of mind and to avoid litigation. The AO imposed the penalty
u/s 271AAA of the Act in respect of such amount.
The
Hon’ble ITAT held that the provision of section 271AAA of the Act can be
only attracted only where search has been conducted u/s 132 of the Act.
In the instant case the assessee is covered only by survey u/s 133A of
the Act and as such initiation of penalty proceeding u/s 271AAA will not
attracted.
The appeal of the revenue is dismissed..
(Please click here for judgment)
|
New User? 
Subscribe Now