9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (7) TMI 1132X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 30, 2009, declaring total income of Rs. 70,61,684 under the normal provisions and Rs. 20,34,97,536 under section 115JB of the Act. In the return deduction under section 10A of Income-tax Act, 1961 at Rs. 11,43,06,038 was claimed. The assessee derived much of its income from export sales from its foreign clients. In the course of its business operations, the assessee incurred expenditure of Rs. 37,75,28,906 abroad. The gross receipts minus expenses incurred abroad i.e., net receipts were remitted to India through proper banking channels. In order to claim deduction under section 10A on this amount of Rs. 37,75,28,906 the assessee had to receive approval from the Reserve Bank of India (RBI). Since on the date of filing of return of income suc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . Therefore, resulting in delay in obtaining permission from Reserve Bank of India, the permission was received vide order dated August 19, 2011 whereas the time to file the revised return had lapsed by March 31, 2011 as per section 139(5). Since the permission from Reserve Bank of India was received late, by that time, the time to file revised return had already lapsed. The revised 10A claim was made through revised computation. The assessee is entitled to claim the deduction before the appellate authority, which was not claimed in the original or revised tax returns. The authorised representative relied on the decision in the case of CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders P. Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336 (Bom). Reliance was also placed on the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Ltd. [1997] 223 ITR 271 (SC). 5. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) observed that the assessee could not file the revised return as the time for filing the revised return had elapsed by March 31, 2011 and since no revised return could be filed the enhanced section 10A deduction was claimed by filing a revised computation. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) further observed that for the assessment year 2008-09 the Dispute Resolution Panel in its order dated September 14, 2012, had allowed netting off of amounts that were validly received in India for the purpose of deduction under section 10A of the Act. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) noted that the assessee was doing work for foreign clients and in the process had to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ined the reasons as to why such claim could not be made in the absence of approval from the Reserve Bank of India. The Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of deduction under section 10A on Rs. 37,75,28,906 also. Aggrieved the Revenue is in appeal before us and raised the following grounds : 1. The order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) is erroneous in law and on facts and law. 2. The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) ought to have upheld the order of the Assessing Officer. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n conformity with the agreement between the appellant and the foreign reinsurers, and that the remittance statement filed along with the application to the Reserve Bank showed that the amount due to the foreign reinsurers as also the brokerage due to the appellant and the balance due to the foreign reinsurers were expressed and remitted in U.S. dollars. The entire transaction effected through the medium of the Reserve Bank of India was expressed in foreign exchange and in effect the retention of the fee due to the appellant for the services rendered was in U. S. dollars. This was receipt of income in convertible foreign exchange. A formal remittance to the foreign reinsurers first and thereafter receipt of the commission from the foreign re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
