https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301433 Unit-III was treated as a separate and distinct undertaking for deduction under section 80IC because it operated from different premises, had separate registrations, employees and client base, and carried on distinct business activities. The fact that it began from premises earlier used as a registered office did not, by itself, establish splitting up or reconstruction of Unit-II. In the absence of evidence that Unit-II's plant and machinery was used for Unit-III, the unit was regarded as an independent expansion into fresh lines of business. Accordingly, Unit-III was eligible for section 80IC deduction and its initial assessment year could not be linked to Unit-II. en-us Fri, 02 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 Mon, 04 Apr 2022 20:58:17 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301433 Unit-III was treated as a separate and distinct undertaking for deduction under section 80IC because it operated from different premises, had separate registrations, employees and client base, and carried on distinct business activities. The fact that it began from premises earlier used as a registered office did not, by itself, establish splitting up or reconstruction of Unit-II. In the absence of evidence that Unit-II's plant and machinery was used for Unit-III, the unit was regarded as an independent expansion into fresh lines of business. Accordingly, Unit-III was eligible for section 80IC deduction and its initial assessment year could not be linked to Unit-II. Case-Laws Income Tax Fri, 02 Nov 2018 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=301433