Tax Management India. Com
Law and Practice  :  Digital eBook
Research is most exciting & rewarding


  TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Follow us:
  Facebook   Twitter   Linkedin   Telegram

TMI Blog

Home

2016 (2) TMI 733

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... in holding that the assessee company has fulfilled all the conditions stipulated in Form No. 10A of the Act and the first appellate authority further erred in not taking into consideration the detailed facts and deficiencies recorded by the AO in the assessment order. Per contra, as we have observed hereinabove, the ld. CIT(A) rightly followed the principal of consistency and properly and correctly following the directions of the Tribunal, the first appellate authority properly considered and adjudicated the issue and after taking into consideration the conditions precedent for grant of exemption u/s 10A of the Act held that the assessee is entitled to exemption u/s10A of the Act. We are unable to see any valid reason to interfere with the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... uring the course of assessment proceedings, it was pointed out before the A.O. by the appellant company by its letter Dt.23/12/2010 that at the time filing of IT Return, instead of mentioning section 10A, section 10B was erroneously referred therein. However the deduction claimed read with Rule 16D and form no.56F was u/s 10A of the Act. The appellant is an STPI registered unit and deduction was claimed in Form No. 56 F under Rule 16D. STPI registered units are considered under sec 10A and not u/s 10B. Deduction u/s 10A is claimed in Form No. 56F under rule 16D. Therefore, it is evident that deduction was claimed by the appellant u/s 10A as per Form No. 56F under rule 16D which was also clarified by the appellant by its letter dt. 23/12/201 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... nuary 2006, thereafter the said green card was renewed upto 31st Dec 2007. The argument of the A.O. that appellant was not in a possession of valid green card as on 31/03/2008, is of no relevance because the green card was valid upto 31/12/2007 and the export transaction was upto the month of September 2007, as is evident from the last invoice dt. 10/09/2007. iv. As per section 10A(2)(ii), the unit is not to be formed by splitting up or reconstruction of business already in existence. Since it was a new unit setup in January 2005, therefore, the above condition is also fulfilled. v. There is no dispute as per Section 10A(2)(iii), that the unit is not formed by transfer to business of machinery or plant previously used for any pu .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ted that all the necessary conditions for claiming deduction u/s 10A or 10B have not been strictly followed. However, the A.O. has not specified which of the conditions stipulated in the section has not been met by the appellant. As regards the alleged mismatch of sale and FIRCs, the appellant has filed copies of the FIRCs and their reconciliation with the export sales as per which payments against the invoices were received within the year (copies of FIRCs were filed before the A.O. as well). Regarding the non preparation or non-filing of softex forms, this was a procedural issue between the STPI unit and STP office and does not impinge upon the allowance of exemption u/s 10A, in case the conditions thereof are satisfied. The appellant sub .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ption was consistently allowed from A.Ys 2005-06 to 2007-08 and there was no valid reason to deviate with the principle of consistency in the year under consideration, i.e. A.Y 2008-09. In the light of the directions of the Tribunal order [supra], when we logically analyse the operative part of the first appellate order as reproduced hereinabove, it is amply clear that the first appellate authority has categorically observed all the necessary conditions specified and required u/s 10A of the Act which entitle the claimant assessee for the same. Thereafter, the first appellate authority proceeded to consider the allegations of the AO and held that the AO has not specified which of the stipulated and necessary conditions of section 10A of the .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

 

 

 

 

Quick Updates:Latest Updates