TMI Blog2015 (5) TMI 575X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessment year under consideration i.e. 2010-11. Therefore, we find that there is no relevance of section 80A(4) of the Act in order to test the efficacy of the claim for deduction of ₹ 70,35,997/- made by the assessee on the strength of the proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Thus, this stand of the Revenue is liable to be rejected. - Decided in favour of assessee. - ITA No.1882/PN/2013 - - - Dated:- 10-4-2015 - Shri G.S. PANNU And MS. Sushma Chowla JJ. For the Appellant : Mr. Nikhil Pathak For the Respondent : Mr. A. K. Modi ORDER Per G. S. Pannu, AM The captioned appeal by the assessee is directed against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-II, Pune dated 04.07.2013 which, in turn, has arisen from an order dated 08.03.2013 passed by the Assessing Officer u/s 143(3) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) pertaining to the assessment year 2010-11. 2. In this appeal, the only grievance of the assessee is against the action of the income-tax authorities in denying deduction for a sum of ₹ 70,35,997/-. 3. In brief, the relevant facts are as follows. The appellant is a company incorporated under the provisi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Act because in the preceding assessment year the tax burden on the assessee qua the said amount was reduced to NIL on account of the deduction u/s 10B of the Act. The CIT(A) has also affirmed the stand of the Assessing Officer against which assessee is in appeal before us. 4. Before us, the sum and substance of the plea raised by the assessee is that having regard to the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, if the assessee does not pay the TDS deducted on an expenditure, then such expenditure is not allowable as a deduction while computing the income. Following the aforesaid, the disallowance of impugned expenditure was made in assessment year 2009-10. Furthermore, in the current assessment year following the provisions of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act, such expenditure was liable to be allowed since the requisite TDS has been paid to the Government in the current year. The Ld. Representative for the assessee vehemently pointed out that there is no double benefit inasmuch as the claim of the assessee is within the purview of section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. The Ld. Representative also pointed out that if there was the legislative intent to prohibit such a claim, the same wou ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... be allowed under any other provisions of the Act for such assessment year. The above amendment has been brought about to curb the claim of multiple deduction by the assessee, though sec 80IA(a) also controls double deduction. These sections are overlapping in nature however, sec 80A(4) has far greater reach. 4.3 In the present case the appellant has already been allowed deduction u/s 1GB on ₹ 59,43,736/- in respect of the business profits derived from EOU unit, the same cannot be considered again for the claim of deduction in respect of expenditure disallowed for earlier years on which the claim of deduction u/s 10B has already been allowed, in any case the claim of double deduction is not in the scheme of the Act itself and, therefore, the claim made by the appellant is liable to be rejected. 6. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. Section 40(a)(ia) of the Act prescribes that in respect of certain expenditure specified therein on which tax is deductible at source under Chapter XVII-B and such tax has not been deducted or, after deduction, has not been paid within the period prescribed therein then such expenditure shall not be allowed as a deduction wh ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... rtaking or unit or enterprise or eligible business is claimed and allowed as a deduction under any of those provisions for any assessment year, deduction in respect of, and to the extent of, such profits and gains shall not be allowed under any other provisions of this Act for such assessment year and shall in no case exceed the profits and gains of such undertaking or unit or enterprise or eligible business, as the case may be. 7. Section 80A(4) of the Act prescribes that where in the case of an assessee any amount of profits and gains of undertaking or unit or enterprise or eligible business is claimed and allowed as a deduction u/s 10A or section 10AA or section 10B or section 10BA or in any provisions of Chapter VI-A under the heading C-Deductions in respect of certain incomes for any assessment year, then deduction in respect of and to the extent of such profits and gains shall not be allowed under any other provisions of this Act for such assessment year and shall in no case exceed the profits and gains of such undertaking or unit or eligible business, as the case may be. Ostensibly, section 80A(4) of the Act has been inserted by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 w.r.e.f. 01 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... vered in section 80A(4) of the Act. Therefore, invoking section 80A(4) of the Act in the present case to deny assessee s claim is anyway not justified. So however, even if for a moment, we accept the invoking section 80A(4) of the Act by the Revenue yet it would cover a situation if multiple deductions are claimed for same profits in the same assessment year. Ostensibly, that is not the case in the present situation because there is no multiple deductions claimed by the assessee qua the impugned amount in the assessment year under consideration i.e. 2010-11. Therefore, we find that there is no relevance of section 80A(4) of the Act in order to test the efficacy of the claim for deduction of ₹ 70,35,997/- made by the assessee on the strength of the proviso to section 40(a)(ia) of the Act. Thus, this stand of the Revenue is liable to be rejected. 9. Now, we may take-up the other plea of the Revenue to the effect that the assessee would derive double benefit if the claim was allowed because in the earlier year such income has not suffered tax on account of the deduction u/s 10B of the Act. In this context, we are unable to find any statutory support to the plea of the Revenue ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
