Harisiddh Specific Family Trust vs Commissioner of Income Tax

D.A. Mehta, J.—Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench ''A'' (the Tribunal) has referred the following question at the instance of the applicant-assessee:

Whether, in law and in the facts and circumstances of the Appellant''s case, the Tribunal was justified in rejecting the Appellant''s claim that for the purposes of calculation of deduction u/s 80I of I.T. Act, the profits derived from the Industrial Undertaking should be reduced by the claim of Investment Deposit u/s 32AB of I.T. Act, in view of the decision of Hon''ble Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Tamil Nadu-V, Madras Vs. Kotagiri Industrial Co-operative Tea Factory Ltd., Kotagiri,

The Assessment Year in question is 1988-89. At the outset learned Senior Standing Counsel for the respondent-revenue invited attention to order dated 27.08.2007 made by this Court in Tax Appeal No. 378 of 1999 and Tax Appeal Nos. 558 of 1999 and 559 of 1999 to submit that identical issue was considered by the High Court and the appeals filed by the applicant-assessee have been dismissed.

Mr. S.N. Soparkar, learned Senior Counsel appearing on behalf of the respondent-assessee in the present case, attempted to distinguish the said order by inviting attention to provisions of Sections 80I of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act) and Section 32AB of the Act as well as the Investment Deposit Account Scheme framed u/s 32AB of the Act for the purposes of claiming deduction to submit that the earlier order deserves re-consideration.

Having heard the learned Counsel appearing for the respective parties the Court is not inclined to take a different view of the matter in assessee''s own case.

In the result, the question, referred for the opinion of this Court, is answered in the affirmative i.e. in favour of the revenue and against the assessee. The reference stands disposed of accordingly with no order as to costs.