2015 (1) TMI 819

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... the assessee is a partnership firm engaged in printing works. The assessee filed its Return of Income declaring total income at Rs. 65,754/- after claiming deduction of Rs. 11,62,483/- u/s.80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 for the A.Y. 2000-01. Assessment scrutiny was undertaken and thereafter, the Assessing Officer passed the order u/s.143(3) on 04.03.2005 holding that the assessee is not entitled to deduction u/s.80IA of the Act. 3. Aggrieved by the aforesaid order, the assessee filed appeal before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) partly allowed the appeal vide order dated 11.11.2005 holding that the assessee is engaged in manufacturing activity as per Section 80IA(2) (iii) of the Act. Against the order of CIT(A), appeals were filed before the A....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 6. In the absence of any material on record, in our opinion, the Assessing Officer could not be justified in stating that the assessee was formed by splitting up of an industrial undertaking. In any case, having not disallowed the claim of the assessee on this ground, the ground for reopening should also have failed. The relevant observations made by the Tribunal regarding reopening of assessment could be found in Para-23 of the impugned judgment, which is reproduced hereunder;      "23. Looking to the facts and circumstances of the case, we condone the delay. On merits, we find that the reopening was on the ground that the activity of the assessee was not manufacturing activity and the industrial activity and the....