IN HIGH COURT OF HIMACHAL PRADESH, SHIMLA ITA No. 33 of 2019 . .P Decided on: 10.12.2019 H Aqua Vitoe Laboratries Appellant Versus of Commissioner of Income Tax Respondent Coram rt Hon ble Mr. Justice L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice. ou Hon'ble Ms. Justice Jyotsna Rewal Dua, Judge. Whether approved for reporting?1 C For appellant: Mr. Amit Singh Chandel, Advocate. For respondent: Mr. Vinay Kuthiala, Senior Advocate, h with M/s. Vandana Kuthiala and Diwan Singh Negi, Advocates. ig H L. Narayana Swamy, Chief Justice. (Oral) OMP (M) No. 4 of 2019 This is application under Section 5 of Limitation Act seeking condonation of delay of four months and two days, which has crept in in filing instant appeal. 1 Whether reporters of local papers may be allowed to see judgment? HCHP 2 2. For reasons stated in application, same is allowed and delay in filing appeal is condoned. . .P application is disposed of accordingly. ITA No. 33 of 2019 H 3. Learned counsel for parties are ad idem that of this appeal is covered by judgment, dated 20 th February, 2019, passed by apex Court in Civil Appeal No. 1784 of 2019, rt titled Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax versus M/s. ou Aarham Softronics. It is apt to reproduce operative portion of said judgment herein: C 24. xxx xxx xxx (a) Judgment dated 20th August, 2018 in Classic h Binding Industries case omitted to take note of ig definition 'initial assessment year' contained in Section 80 IC itself and instead based its H conclusion on definition contained in Section 80 IB, which does not apply in these cases. definitions of 'initial assessment year' in two sections, viz. Sections 80 IB and 80 IC are materially different. definition of 'initial assessment year' under Section 80 IC has made all difference. Therefore, we are of opinion ::: Downloaded on - 14/12/2019 10:47:04 :::HCHP 3 that aforesaid judgment does not lay down correct law. . .P (b) undertaking or enterprise which had set up new unit between 7th January, 2003 and 1st H April, 2012 in State of Himachal Pradesh of nature mentioned in clause (ii) of sub section (2) of of Section 80 IC, would be entitled to deduction at rate of 100% of profits and gains for five assessment years commencing with 'initial rt assessment year'. For next five years, admissible deduction would be 25% (or 30% where ou assessee is company) of profits and gains. (c) However, in case substantial expansion is C carried out as defined in clause (ix) of sub section (8) of Section 80 IC by such undertaking or h enterprise, within aforesaid period of 10 years, ig said previous year in which substantial expansion is undertaken would become 'initial H assessment year', and from that assessment year assessee shall be entitled to 100% deductions of profits and gains. (d) Such deduction, however, would be for total period of 10 years, as provided in sub section (6). For example, if expansion is carried out immediately, on completion of first five years, ::: Downloaded on - 14/12/2019 10:47:04 :::HCHP 4 assessee would be entitled to 100% deduction again for next five years. On other hand, if substantial expansion is undertaken, say, in 8 th . .P year by assessee such assessee would be entitled to 100% deduction for first five years, H deduction @ 25% of profits and gains for next two years and @ 100% again from 8 th year as of this year becomes 'initial assessment year' once again. However, this 100% deduction would be for remaining three years, i.e. 8th, 9th and 10th rtassessment years. ou 4. Accordingly, this appeal is disposed of in terms of afore cited judgment. Pending miscellaneous applications, C if any, shall also stand disposed of. (L. Narayana Swamy) h Chief Justice ig (Jyotsna Rewal Dua) H Judge December 10, 2019 ( rajni ) Aqua Vitoe Laboratries v. Commissioner of Income-tax