Iapl/218/2016 Of Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax Varanasi v. M/S Agrawal Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. Varanasi

Case :- INCOME TAX APPEAL No. - 218 of 2016 Appellant :- Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax VaranasiRespondent :- M/S Agrawal Extrusions Pvt. Ltd. VaranasiCounsel for Appellant :- S.S.C. I.T.,Praveen KumarCounsel for Respondent :- Nitin Kesarwani,Rakesh Ranjan Agrawal Hon'ble Bharati Sapru,J.Hon'ble Piyush Agrawal,J. This is a Department's appeal under section 260- A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for theAssessment Year 2010-11 against an order of theIncome Tax Appellate Tribunal, AllahabadCircuit Bench at Varanasi dated 17.03.2016. The questions of law, sought to be answered, areherein under:- "(A) Whether, ITAT has erred in law in quashing action ofAssessing Officer under section 154 in rectifying bonafidemistake committed in calculated liability of Assessee undersection 115JB when Assessee himself calculated MAT Creditunder section 115JA at Rs.3,432/- in his computation ofincome? (B) Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of case, ITAT isillegally justified to quash order passed by Assessing Officerunder section 154 which was based on facts that the originalorder passed under section 143(3) was based on the wrongclaim of Assessee vis-a-vis its claim in the just preceding year? (C) Whether, on facts and in the circumstances of case, ITAT isillegally justified to hold that Assessee's manufacturing unit issituated in SEZ area and provisions of Section 115JB are notapplicable in its case although Assessee itself applied section115JB for calculating its tax liability in just preceding year?" We have heard Shri Praveen Kumar, learnedcounsel for the Department - appellant and ShriRakesh Ranjan Agrawal, learned Senior Counselassisted by Shri Nitin Kesarwani, learned counselfor the respondent - assessee at length and wehave also perused the orders of the authorities below. The Tribunal has come to the categorical findingthat the respondent's Unit situate at Sitarganj,Udham Singh Nagar (Uttarakhand), whichcarried on business and service in the SpecialEconomic Zone and therefore, the provisions ofsection 115-JB of the Income Tax Act would notapply to the income accrued or arising on or after1st April, 2005. The provisions of section 115-JB(6) is quoted herein below:- "Section 115-JB(6):- The provisions of this section shall notapply to the income accrued or arising on or after the 1st dayof April, 2005 from any business carried on, or servicesrendered, by an entrepreneur or a Developer, in a Unit orSpecial Economic Zone, as the case may be." The Tribunal has rightly come to the conclusion that the Assessing Officer had made no mistakein the order originally passed on 14.01.2013 andthe later order dated 28.03.2013 was passedillegally under section of the Income Tax Act. In view of the clear evidence of the Unit situated in the Special Economic Zone, the order of theTribunal is upheld. The questions are answeredin favour of the respondent - Assessee and againstthe appellant. The appeal is, accordingly, dismissed. Order Date :- 26.3.2019Amit Mishra