TMI Blog2020 (2) TMI 1234X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... TAKA HIGH COURT] and M/S. CAMICERIA APPARELS INDIA P. [ 2019 (3) TMI 73 - MADRAS HIGH COURT] we are inclined to take a view that the income brought to tax under Section 41 of the Act by reversal of the entry with regard to the stock option given to the employees is also in the nature of 'export income' and therefore, the Assessee is entitled to exemption / deduction under Section 10-A / 10-B of the Act and the view taken by the learned Tribunal is not sustainable. - Decided in favour of assessee. - Tax Case (Appeal) Nos.206 & 207 of 2009 - - - Dated:- 12-2-2020 - Dr. Justice Vineet Kothari And Mr. Justice R. Suresh Kumar For the Appellant : Mr.R.Kumar for M/s.T.N.Seetharaman For the Respondent : Mr.T.Ravi Kumar Senio ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 02 and are of the same nature and, accordingly the amount credited this year is eligible for the relief claimed vide decision CIT Vs.Abdul Rahman Industries (2007) 293 ITR 475 (Mad)? 4.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the interest of ₹ 60,20,491/- earned by the assessee on loan advanced to its wholly owned subsidiary in USA for working capital is not business income of the assessee overlooking the principles laid down by the Supreme Court for determining the true nature of the Income? T.C.A.No.207 of 2009 1.Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Appellate Tribunal is right in law in holding that the interest of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... f the Act could be treated as 'export income' of the Assessee and was therefore entitled to deduction under Section 10-A/10-B of the Act, which issue was decided by the learned Tribunal against the Assessee with the following reasons. 7................ We considered this issue. We are not able to agree with the argument of the ld.C.A. This amount of ₹ 1,11,07,792/-is not in the nature of profits and gains derived by the assessee from the export of articles or things for the profits and gains derived by a hundred percent export-oriented undertaking from the export of articles or things or computer software. As it is evidenced from the simple facts of the case, the amount of ₹ 1,11,07,792/- has not been added to ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s well as the income were credited only by book entries and in fact there is no question of income at all. The credit has been occurred in the Profit Loss Account only because of the necessity of accounting. Therefore, on the basis of real income concept, the amount of ₹ 1,11,07,792/- cannot be treated as income at all. 4.The learned counsel for the Assessee however submitted that the controversy is covered by the judgment of a Division Bench of this Court in the case of Camiceria Apparels India Pvt Ltd -Vs- A.C.I.T in TCA No.1972 and 1973 of 2008 decided on 04.02.2019, which followed the Full Bench judgment of the Karnataka High Court in case of C.I.T -Vs- Hewlett Packard Global Soft Ltd decided on 30.10.2017 reporte ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... to since they are distinguishable in law for the reasons stated above. 21. The assessee before us has lost throughout in the proceedings before the lower authorities and the issue has been held against it based on a decision of the Tribunal in the case of ABI Showatech (India) Ltd. V. DCIT that inturn relies on the judgment of this Court in the case of Menon Impex (supra) and other orders of the Tribunal itself. 22. In the case of Menon Impex (supra), the legal distinction argued before us and noted above has evidently not been placed for consideration before that Bench which decides the matter against the assessee following the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of CIT V. Sterlings Foods ((1999) 237 ITR 579), that has bee ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... or advancing of staff loans by such special category of assessees covered under Section 10A or 10B of the Act is integral part of their export business activity and a business decision taken in view of the commercial expediency and the interest income earned incidentally cannot be delinked from its profits and gains derived by the Undertaking engaged in the export of Articles as envisaged under Section 10-A or Section 10-B of the Act and cannot be taxed separately under Section 56 of the Act. 38. We therefore affirm and agree with the view expressed by the first Division Bench of this Court in the case of Motorola India Electronics (P) Ltd., (supra) and we do not agree with the view taken by the subsequent Division Bench on 10/04/201 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
