2017 (1) TMI 627

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Mr. Nitesh Joshi, a/w. Mr. Atul Jasani, for the Respondent ORDER P. C. Both these appeals under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 ("the Act") challenge the common order dated 27 August 2013 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ("Tribunal") for Assessment Years 2007-08 and 2009-10. 2. In both the appeals the Revenue has urged the following common question of law for ou....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... did not accept the claim of the Respondent-Assessee being of the view that the items claimed to be a result of manufacture were only a process of assembling. Therefore, the benefit of Section 80IC of the Act was denied by the Assessing Officer. 5. Being aggrieved, the Respondent filed an appeal to the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) (CIT(A)). By an order dated 25 August 2010, the CIT(A) a....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... that the Respondent-Assessee is entitled to the benefit of Section 801C of the Act. 6. Being aggrieved, the Revenue carried the issue to the Tribunal. The impugned order of the Tribunal applied the test of manufacture as laid down by this Court in CIT vs. Supreme Graphics Creations P. Ltd. & Anr. 276 ITR page 668 and by the Apex Court in Computer Graphics vs. CIT 308 ITR 98 to hold that the pr....