Ita/103/2013 Of The Commissioner Of Income Tax-I v. Appolo Tyres Ltd

IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAMPRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE S.V.BHATTI & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE BECHU KURIAN THOMASTHURSDAY, THE 29 DAY OF JULY 2021 / 7TH SRAVANA, 1943ITA NO. 103 OF 2013 AGAINST THE ORDER IN ITA 378/2009 OF I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH,ERNAKULAM APPELLANT/S: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-ICOCHIN. BY ADVS.SRI.P.K.R.MENON,SR.COUNSEL, GOI(TAXES)SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME TAXSRI.CHRISTOPHER ABRAHAM, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENTSRI.K.M.V.PANDALAI, INCOME TAX DEPARTMENT RESPONDENT/S: APOLLO TYRES LTD.,6TH FLOOR, CHERUPUZHPAM BUILDING, SHANMUGHAM ROAD, KOCHI-682031. BY ADVS.SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOSSRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOSSRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOSSRI.ABRAHAM VARGHESE THARAKANSRI.BINU MATHEWSRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE SR.SRI.TOM THOMAS KAKKUZHIYIL THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING COME UP FOR HEARING ON 29.07.2021,THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: S.V.Bhatti, J. J U D G M E N T Heard learned Standing Counsel Mr. Christopher Abrahamand learned Senior Counsel Mr. Joseph Markos for parties. 2.The Commissioner of Income Tax/Revenue is theappellant. M/s.Apollo Tyres Ltd., Kochi/Assessee is therespondent. The subject appeal is at the instance of Revenuefrom the order of Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (for short ‘theTribunal'), Cochin Bench in ITA No.378/Coch/2009 dated24.08.2012. The appeal deals with the Assessment Year 2003-04.The following substantial questions of law are stated forconsideration in this appeal: “1. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase and also in the light of /Section 43B of the IncomeTax Act,the Tribunal is right in allowing the deduction for the bonus in I.T.A. No.103/2013 the Asst. Year 2003-04 claimable and paid in the AssessmentYear 2002-03? 2. Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase and for the reasons stated in the grounds, the Tribunal isright in law allowing the claim of Rs. 2,32,93,575/- stating thatit was spent for acquisition of revenue items and is allowableunder Section 37 of the Act as current expenses? 3.Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of thecase the Tribunal is right in law and fact in holding that DGPower Generation Units 1 and II constituted an "undertaking"under Sec. 80 IA of the Income tax Act? 4.Whether DG Power Generation units 1 and II are entitled to the benefit of Sec. 80 1A of the Income tax Act? 3.At the hearing of appeal, question nos.3 and 4 alone are pressed for consideration. It is also stated, as a matter of fact, that the questions raised in this appeal, namely questionnos. 3 and 4 are similar to the questions raised by the Revenuein ITA No. 69/2011 and ITA No.70/2011 for the Assessment Year2002-03. On 27.02.2019 the appeals filed by the Revenue were I.T.A. No.103/2013 dismissed. Our attention has been drawn to the reasoning and conclusion recorded by this Court on similar questions framedin ITA Nos.69 and 70 of 2011. By following the reasoning and conclusion recorded in ITANos.69 and 70/2011, the substantial questions of law raised asquestion nos.3 and 4 are answered in favour of the assessee andagainst the Revenue. The appeal is dismissed. No order as tocosts. Sd/- S.V.BHATTIJUDGE Sd/- BECHU KURIAN THOMAS JUDGE jjj I.T.A. No.103/2013 PETITIONER ANNEXURE ANNEXURE A ANNEXURE B ANNEXURE C ANNEXURE D ANNEXURE E APPENDIX OF ITA 103/2013 COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.143(3) PASSED BY THE ASSESSING OFFICER ON 27.3.2006 FOR AY 2003-04. COPY OF THE ASSESSMENT ORDER U/S.143(3) R.W.S. 147 DATED 12.12.2008. COPY OF CIT (A)'S ORDER DATED 25.4.2006. COPY OF CIT THE (A)'S ORDER DATED 30.3.2009. ORDER OF THE ITAT, IN ITA NO.430/COCH/2006 & 378/COCH/2009 DATED 24.8.2012.