Itxa/767/2013 Of Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Nrox Specialities

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL (L) NO.1565 OF 2012 Commissioner of Income Tax, Valsad..Appellant.V/s.M/s. NROX Specialities..Respondent. Mr. Tejveer Singh, for the Appellant.None for the Respondent. P.C:- CORAM: J.P.DEVADHAR & M.S.SANKLECHA,JJ.DATE : 27[th] FEBRUARY, 2013. Office objections waived. 2In this Appeal for the Assessment Year 2004-05 by the Revenue, following question has been raised for our consideration:- Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee is eligible for deduction u/s. 80IB even though the assessee has failed to fulfuill the conditions laid down in sub-section(iv) to section 80IB(2) of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 3The grievance of the Revenue is that Respondent-Assessee employed less than 10 workers. There was violation of condition laid down in sub-section (iv) of the Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 S.R.JOSHI and consequently, not entitled to the redemption under the above provisions. 4The grievance of the Revenue against the impugned order is that it ignored the confessional statement made during course of survey proceeding in which it was stated that less than 10 workers were employed by the assessee. In fact in the appeal before the CIT(A), Respondent-Assessee demonstrated the fact that it had employed more than 10 workers by placing on record its wage register and working for personnel cost and wages along with the number of workers. The salary and wages of more than 10 workers was debited to its accounts for the assessment year and the same was audited. These accounts were not challenged by the Revenue. In these circumstances, as the finding is one of fact, we see no reason to entertain the proposed question of law. 5Accordingly, appeal is dismissed with no order as to costs. (M.S.SANKLECHA,J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR,J.)