Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2021 (6) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (6) TMI 111 - HC - Income TaxReopening of assessment u/s 147 - excess claim of Deduction u/s 10B - HELD THAT:- The case of the respondent (Revenue) is that the petitioner was in the habit of making an excess claim under Section 10B of the IT Act, 1961 and this fact came to be knowledge of the Department only when a survey was conducted during March 2010. It is submitted that, this information was not available earlier when the assessment orders were passed both under Section 143(1). No merits in the present writ petition. If the accounts were castled to distort the income to show higher profit from EOU operation to claim deduction under Section 10B of the IT Act, 1961, the Income Tax Department would be justified in reopening the assessment under Section 148 of the IT Act, 1961, for the purpose of the proviso to Section 147 of the IT Act, 1961. Facts also indicate that an order was passed for the assessment year 2005-2006 as is evident from the preamble to be final order dated 30.08.2013 of the Tribunal as noted that the submission of the Respondent that this was not the first time the petitioner had claimed deduction under Section 10B of the IT Act, 1961. It appears that for the aforesaid year, CIT(Appeals)-IV vide order dated 21.09.2010, had observed that, “Since transfer cost of materials between the EOU and all EOU units has been wrongly recorded the deduction u/s 10B should be restricted to the profits of the EOU units after recording the transfer of the material at the correct cost.”. The issue on merits is apparently covered in favour of the petitioner in the case of Scientific Atlanta India Technology Private Ltd [2010 (2) TMI 658 - ITAT, CHENNAI] and similar views in Changpond Technologies (P) Ltd vs ACIT [2008 (2) TMI 486 - ITAT MADRAS-A] and Enercon Wind Farm (Krishna) Ltd. [2007 (12) TMI 306 - ITAT MUMBAI] It is therefore for the petitioner to substantiate its case before the respondent by citing the above decisions and get the issue decided on merits in its favour. Writ petition is dismissed. The Respondent is therefore directed to pass appropriate orders in accordance with law on merits.
|