Valsad Dist. Co.Op.Milk Producers ... vs Department Of Income Tax

आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद यायपीठ 'ए' अहमदाबाद। IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "A" BENCH, AHMEDABAD BEFORE SHRI G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT AND SHRI S. S. GODARA, JUDICIAL MEMBER आयकर अपील सं./ ./ ITA No. 3301/Ahd/2011 िनधा रण वष /Assessment Year: 2008-09 ACIT, V/s. Valsad District Co. Op. Milk Navsari Circle, Producers' Union Ltd., Navsari Vashudhara Dairy, N.H. No.8, Alipore, Tal. Chikhli PAN : AAAAV 0542 R

अपीलाथ / (Appellant) ू"यथ यथ / (Respondent)

Revenue by : Shri Dinesh Singh, Sr. DR.

Assessee(s) by : Written Submission

सुनवाई क% तार'ख/ / Dateof Hearing : 12/06/2015 घोषणा क% तार'ख / Date of Pronouncement: 19/06/2015

आदे श/O R D E R

PER G.D. AGRAWAL, VICE PRESIDENT:

This is an appeal filed by the Revenue and is directed against the order of the Ld. Commissioner of Income-tax(Appeals), Valsad dated 30.09.2011, pertaining to Assessment Year 2008-09.

2. The only ground raised in this appeal by the Revenue reads as under:-

On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Hon'ble CIT(A) erred in deleting the addition of Rs.14,65,254/- made on account of disallowance of expenses reimbursed to the Vasudhara Trust for research and development carried out by the BAIF trust inspite of the fact that both are independent identity and have no business dealing for the assessee and the said expenditure and was not incurred for the business purpose of the assessee.

ITA No. 3301/Ahd/2011 ACIT vs Valsad Dist. Co op Milk Producers Union Ltd For AY 2008-09 2

3. At the time of hearing before us, none appeared on behalf of the assessee; but a written submission is filed which is considered.

4. We have heard the ld. Departmental Representative, perused the written submission furnished by the assessee and the orders of the lower authorities. We find that the issue under consideration is squarely covered by the decision of ITAT in the earlier years. In Assessment Year 2003-04, vide ITA No.3109/Ahd/2007, the ITAT upheld the order of the CIT(A) with the following findings:-

"5.1. The first issue relates to disallowance of amount paid to Vasundhara Trust to carry out research and development activities. The Ld CIT(A) noticed that the assessee is empowered to carry out Research and Development Activities in collaboration with other organizations. He also noticed that the impugned payment has been made to Vasundhara Trust for carrying out the research activities. Accordingly, he deleted the impugned addition. It was brought to our notice that the Tribunal has considered an identical issue in the assessee's own case in ITA No.1349/AHD/2006 relating to the Assessment Year 2002-03, wherein the Tribunal has upheld the decision of Ld. CIT (A) in deleting the addition. For the sake of convenience we extract below the operative portion of the order of the Tribunal".

"26. After hearing both the parties and on perusal of the record, we find that clause 18 of section 3 of the bye-laws of the assessee society does not empower the assessee society to carry out its objective in collaboration with any other entity, institution or persons. The assessee has placed on record a copy of the relevant resolutions passed at the meetings of the managing committee of the assessee society resolving collaboration with Vasundhara Research and Development Mandal and Dr. Manibhai Desai Technology Transfer Centre. From the above said resolution and copies of memorandum it can be seen that these are merely extension of the activity of the assessee society and the collaboration made by the assessee is not ultra vires. ...Can co-ordinate and undertake any of the activities which are connected with carrying out the objects of the assessee society. The assessee has supplied a copy of resolution passed in the meeting of Managing Committee of the society. Therefore, the CIT (A) has allowed the claim ITA No. 3301/Ahd/2011 ACIT vs Valsad Dist. Co op Milk Producers Union Ltd For AY 2008-09 3

of the assessee. Since the CIT (A) has passed detailed and elaborate order, therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the same. Accordingly, we dismiss the ground No.1 taken by the Revenue."

Since the decision rendered by Ld CIT(A) on this issue is consistent with the view taken by the Tribunal cited supra, we do not find any reason to interfere with the same.

5. Admittedly, the facts of the year under consideration are identical. The CIT(A) has also allowed relief to the assessee following the decision of the ITAT. In view of above, we do not find any justification to interfere with the order of the CIT(A) which is sustained.

6. In the result, the Revenue's appeal is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the Court on 19th June, 2015 at Ahmedabad.

Sd/- Sd/-

(S. S. GODARA) (G.D. AGRAWAL) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDENT Ahmedabad; Dated 19/06/2015 Biju T., PS

षत Copy आदे श क% ूितिल-प अमे-षत/ of the Order forwarded to : 1. अपीलाथ / The Appellant 2. ू"यथ / The Respondent. 3. संबंिधत आयकर आयु/ / Concerned CIT 4. आयकर आयु/(अपील) / The CIT(A)

5. -वभागीय ूितिनिध, आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / DR, ITAT, Ahmedabad

6. गाड फाईल / Guard file.

/ BY ORDER, आदे शानु सार

TRUE COPY Dy./Asstt.Registrar) उप/सहायक पंजीकार ( उप/ अिधकरण, अहमदाबाद / आयकर अपीलीय अिधकरण, ITAT, Ahmedabad