Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2019 (5) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2019 (5) TMI 947 - AT - Income TaxRevision u/s 263 - claim of deduction under section 10A(lA) - as per Pr. CIT the benefit of Section 10A/10B should be allowed after setting off losses as per the provisions of Section 71 & 72 from eligible units run by the tax payer - assessee relying on Circular No.1/2013 dated 17.1.2013 - HELD THAT:- We observe that during the course of proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Act specific query was raised by A.O by way of questionnaire dated 9.2.2015 regarding the justification of deduction/ exemption claimed u/s 10A. From perusal of the extract of the questionnaire issued by Ld. A.O dated 9.2.2015 and specific reply dated 3.3.2015 clearly shows that this is not the case of ‘NO ENQUIRY’ rather the Ld. A.O has made a “PROPER AND DETAILED ENQUIRY” and accepted the claim of the assessee by interpreting the provisions of law, judicial pronouncements as well as the Circular issued by Central Board of Direct Taxes. From perusal of the judgments in CIT & ANR V/s M/s. Yokogawa India Ltd [2016 (12) TMI 881 - SUPREME COURT] & Decision Craft Analytics Ltd V/s DCIT [2019 (4) TMI 191 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] it is well established that in the instant case the assessee made correct claim by firstly taking the benefit of Section 10A for the profits earned from SEZ units and remaining profits of other units including SEZ unit were utilised for setoff of current and brought forward losses. It remains an undisputed fact that the Assessing Officer had made adequate enquires as noted herein above adopting one of permissible view for allowing the assessee’s claim for exemption u/s 10A before the claim of set off of brought forward and current year loss. Pr. CIT took a different view of the matter. However that would not be sufficient to permit Ld. Pr. CIT to exercise the power u/s 263 of the Act because when two views are possible and Ld. Pr.CIT does not agree with the view taken by the Assessing Officer, assessment order cannot be treated as erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the revenue unless the view taken by the Assessing Officer not unacceptable in law. We therefore set aside the finding of Pr. CIT on this issue as it was a mere change of opinion which would not enable Ld. Pr. CIT to exercise jurisdiction u/s 263 as the A.O had considered the details and the explanation offered by the assessee before accepting the claim. - Decided in favour of assessee. Revision u/s 263 - computing the book profit u/s 115JB - non inclusion the disallowance of interest paid to Income Tax and also directing the Ld. A.O for verifying the claim of additional depreciation on the alleged purchase of old and used plant and machinery - HELD THAT:- Ld. Counsel for the assessee fairly accepted that this finding of Pr. CIT is correct and the directions given to the Ld. A.O to examine these issues two afresh is valid. We therefore uphold the order of Pr. CIT assuming jurisdiction u/s 263 only to the extent of direction given for computation of book profit u/s 115JB after considering the interest paid on income tax and direction to verify claim of additional depreciation on old and used machineries. - Appeal of the assessee is partly allowed.
|