2014 (8) TMI 1168

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....) erred in deleting the additions made by the AO u/s 80IB(3). 2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld CIT (A) erred in holding that the test of eligibility to section 80IB / 80IA is to be determined in the initial assessment year and once the industrial undertaking fulfils all the prescribed conditions in first years, it becomes eligible to claim deduction for a total tax Holiday period of ten years." 3. Briefly stated relevant facts of the case are that the assessee is engaged in the business of „manufacturing, importing and exporting of chemicals emulsifiers etc‟. Assessee filed the return of income declaring the total income of Rs. 8,58,04,905/- after claiming deduction of Rs. 3,76,....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e proceedings before us, Shri K.K. Ved, Ld Counsel for the assessee relied on the order of the CIT (A). Further, Ld Counsel filed a copy of the judgment of the Hon‟ble Karnataka High Court in the case of M/s. Ace Multi Axes Systems Ltd vs. DCIT vide ITA No.477 of 2013, dated 28.7.2014, which is found to be very akin to the facts of the present case and the said judgment is relevant for the proposition that "a literal interpretation of a provision was not necessary in matters of granting deduction u/s 80IB to a Small Scale Industry, which finally prospered into bigger company". 6. On the other hand, Ld DR relied on the order of the AO. 7. We have heard both the parties and perused the orders of the Revenue Authorities as well as ....