Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2018 (9) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2018 (9) TMI 957 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of set off of loss of MEPZ (10M) unit against income of taxable unit - loss suffered by the assessee in the unit eligible for deduction u/s 10AA - Held that:- Keeping in view the fact that section 10AA makes the assessee eligible for deduction in the same manner, the deduction prescribed u/s 10A and 10B and it cannot be treated in the nature of exemption and as such, the loss suffered by the assessee in the unit eligible for deduction u/s 10AA can be set off against the normal business income. So far as question of amendment of section 10A is concerned, the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Allied Motors (P.) Ltd. vs. CIT [1997 (3) TMI 9 - SUPREME COURT] and CIT vs. Gold Coin Health Food (P.) Ltd. (2008 (8) TMI 5 - SUPREME COURT) has decided the identical issue by holding that, “when the amendment is curative in nature it has to be read from its inception.” So, we are of the considered view that the amendment of section 10A by way of inserting explanation is only declaratory in nature having retrospective effect. We are of the considered view that the CIT (A) has taken valid, legal and plausible view that the deduction is to be allowed from the total income of the unit and not from the total income of the assessee under Chapter IV of the Act and not at the stage of total income under Chapter VI of the Act. So, ground no.1 is determined against the Revenue. Depreciation @ 60% on computer software - Held that:- CIT (A) has granted the relief in accordance with the settled principles of law by holding that, “the E-TDS software, E-scan, antivirus attachment control, ME&S Software upgrade are clearly in the nature of routine software for the purpose of antiviral control and for upgrading the existing software” and held the same to be revenue in nature and on the balance amount of ₹ 16,45,000/- directed the AO to allow the depreciation @ 60%. Assessee has not preferred to challenge the findings given by the ld. CIT (A) by filing cross appeal. No illegality or perversity in the findings of CIT (A), ground is determined against the Revenue.
|