https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209317 The Tribunal determined that Unit-II was a separate manufacturing unit from Unit-I, based on distinct machinery and location, rejecting the AO's argument of it being an extension. It directed the apportionment of expenses based on turnover, granting 100% deduction under Section 80-IB for Unit-II and adjusting the deduction for Unit-I. The disallowance of salary and wages for Unit-II was reduced by the CIT(A) to two employees, with no disallowance for Unit-I. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, allowing the assessee's appeal for appropriate expense apportionment and deductions. en-us Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 Tue, 07 Feb 2012 19:11:00 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209317 The Tribunal determined that Unit-II was a separate manufacturing unit from Unit-I, based on distinct machinery and location, rejecting the AO's argument of it being an extension. It directed the apportionment of expenses based on turnover, granting 100% deduction under Section 80-IB for Unit-II and adjusting the deduction for Unit-I. The disallowance of salary and wages for Unit-II was reduced by the CIT(A) to two employees, with no disallowance for Unit-I. The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, allowing the assessee's appeal for appropriate expense apportionment and deductions. Case-Laws Income Tax Thu, 25 Feb 2010 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=209317