TMI Blog2017 (10) TMI 424X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the claim of deduction by the assessee altogether. Once, the pe mission granted by the office of Development Commissioner stands ratified, the ratification would relate back to the date of permission. It is not the case of the AO that other terms and conditions for availing exemption under s.10B of the Act has not been complied with. In the instant case, it appears from the communication letter dated 14/03/2013 that letter of permission dated 25/05/2007 issued in favour of the assessee for registration as 100% EOU under STPI Scheme was stated to be ratified in the first meeting of Inter-Ministerial Standing Committee (IMSC) on 2-6-2008 constituted by Central Government for such purposes. As noted, the ratification subsequently carried ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ned order of the CIT(A) are broadly similar. The Ground extracted from ITA No.617/Ahd/2015 AY 2008-09 for ready reference read as under:- 1. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts in allowing the assessee s alternate claim of deduction u/s.10A which was not claimed in the Return of Income, in place of its original claim of deduction u/s.10B. 2. The Ld.CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts by not calling for the AO s comments to the rejoinder filed by the assessee on the Remand Report of the AO. 3. The common grounds raised in the cross-objections of the assessee read as under (extracted from CO No.65/Ahd/2015 AY 2008- 1. The learned CIT(A) has erred in law and on facts of the case in upholding reopening u/s.147 of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee-company is stated to be registered with STPI (Software Technology Parks of India), Gandhinagar as 100% EOU (Export Oriented Undertaking) for carrying on business of development and export of computer software and IT enabled services. On the strength of aforesaid registration, the assessee filed its return of income for the various assessment years in captioned appeals wherein deductions of varied amounts have been claimed under s.10B of the Act. The Assessing Officer (AO) denied the claim of deduction under s.10B against the profits and gains derived by 100% EOU from export of articles or things n the ground that conditions specified under s.10B of the Act has not been fulfilled. It is the case of the AO that clause(iv) of Expl ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... as also challenged the denial of original claim of deduction under s.10B of the Act as per its return of income. 8. The Ld.DR for the revenue Mr.Prasoon Kabra at the outset submitted that the CIT(A) misdirected itself in law in allowing alternative claim of deduction u/s.10A of the Act without giving any opportunity to the AO to verify the terms and conditions specified for eligibility of claim under s.10A of the Act. The Ld.DR submitted that sections 10A 10B has been deliberately segregated by the Statute and conditions for claim of deductions are required to be satisfied independently which has not been done in the present case. It was thus contended that the order of the CIT(A) is vitiated. The Ld.DR relied upon the decision of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... aimed. 10. The Ld.AR next submitted that the claim of deduction under s.10B of the Act was earlier allowed after due deliberation in the original assessment order passed under s.143(3) of the Act dated 25/10/2010. It was thus contended that the case re-opened under s.147 of the Act to deny the claim earlier allowed on a mere change of opinion is not sustainable in law. The Ld.AR accordingly submitted that appeal of the Revenue is required to be dismissed and Cross Objections of the assessee for eligibility of claimed under s.10B of the Act is required to be upheld. 11. We have carefully considered the rival submissions. We observe at the outset that a clarification instruction has been issued by the CBDT being instruction No.02/2009 d ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee for registration as 100% EOU under STPI Scheme was stated to be ratified in the first meeting of Inter-Ministerial Standing Committee (IMSC) on 2-6-2008 constituted by Central Government for such purposes. As noted, the ratification subsequently carried out and communicated will operate from the date of letter of permission issued by the Development Commissioner. Therefore, in our considered view, the action of the AO and CIT(A) in denying the claim of deduction under s.10B of the Act requires to be set aside as unsustainable in law. Consequently, the Cross Objection filed by the assessee requires to be viewed favorably on merits. As a corollary, we do not consider it expedient to deal with the correctness of action of CIT(A) in a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
