9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (7) TMI 691X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... The Tax Case Appeal was admitted on 24.08.2018 on the following Substantial Questions of Law. "(a) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is eligible for deduction U/s.10AA of the Income-tax Act 1961, even though the assessee is not carrying on any manufacturing at its SEZ Unit? (b) Whether the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee is carrying on manufacturing activity even though a new product having a distinctive name, character or use was not brought into existence at its SEZ Unit by the assessee as per Special Economic Zone Act 2005?" 3. We have heard Mrs.Premalatha, learned standing counsel for the appellant/revenue and Mr.S.Raj Makesh, learned counsel appearing for the respondent / assessee. 4. Th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the assessee on the grounds that what was imported by the assessee and what was exported are the same product and therefore, there was no manufacturing activity done by the assessee to be eligible to claim deduction. In fact, an Inspector from the department had visited the factory to acquaint himself with the process adopted by the assessee in their SEZ Unit. This fact has been recorded by the Assessing Officer in the order of assessment dated 30.03.2016. But, the Assessing Officer, chose to refer to the 'Gate Pass' issued by the Government wherein the description of the goods, is shown as 'Tailings rich in ilemnite'. Further the Assessing Officer opined that a minor activity of sieving to separate dust particles only is ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n the SEZ unit and also pointed out that the Assessing Officer himself has accepted that the assessee's unit, processed the raw materials by removing 10 to 20% impurities. Cost comparison of the semi finished product with that of the raw material was also referred to and it was also pointed out that the Assessing Officer could not establish that the assessee has suppressed the purchase cost of semi-finished goods in order to claim higher deduction under Section 10AA of the Act. Furthermore, the certificate issued by the Assistant Development Officer was accepted on the ground that the revenue could not prove the same to be not genuine. Therefore, the tribunal sustained the factual finding recorded by the CIT(A). 12. Thus, in our consi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
