I.T.A.No.162/2012 08.11.2012 Shri Sanjay Lal, Advocate for the appellant.
This appeal is directed against an order dated 11.05.2012 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Indore Bench, Indore in I.T.A.No.111/Ind/2012 by which the Tribunal allowed the appeal filed by the assessee, recorded a finding that the product manufactured by the respondent was detergent and not soap, so the respondent was entitled for deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act.
This order has been assailed by the appellant on following grounds:- 1.
That the Tribunal was having no jurisdiction to reassess the evidence and to record a finding that the product in question was detergent.”
2. That the CIT(A) recorded a finding that the product in question was a soap and the assessee was not entitled for deduction under section 80IB of the Income Tax Act.
It is submitted by Shri Lal, learned counsel appearing for the Revenue that there was no new material before the Board to record the aforesaid finding.
We have gone through the order passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal and find that the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, after appreciating the entire procedure, the chemical ingredients of soap and detergent in para 3.4 of the order has recorded a finding that the product manufactured by the respondent is detergent and not soap.
The Tribunal has made elaborate discussion in the impugned order.
Though the finding of C.I.T.(Appeals) has been reversed but a definite finding has been recorded by the Tribunal that the product in question is detergent.
During the couRs.of the argument, Shri Lal also submitted that the Tribunal was having no jurisdiction to enlarge the scope of the Appeal by recording a finding that the product in question was a detergent.
To appreciate the aforesaid, it would be appropriate to say that the Tribunal is a final Authority for appreciation of fact and if after re- appreciating entire facts recorded a finding that the product in question was not soap and in fact was detergent, then the Tribunal was within its jurisdiction to record such a finding.
Under section 254 of the Income Tax Act the Appellate Tribunal is having power to re-appreciate the evidence and to record a finding.
In view of this, the aforesaid finding cannot be interfered in the appeal.
The appellant has suggested the following substantial question of law involved in the appeal:- "1.
Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the ITAT was justified in law in allowing the deduction of Rs.663956/- claimed by the assessee u/s 80IB?." In our opinion, such question does not arise for our consideration, in the facts of the case.
This appeal does not involve any substantial question of law and is hereby dismissed with no order as to costs.
(Krishn Kumar Lahoti) (Smt.
Vimla Jain) Judge Judge psm