2013 (8) TMI 561 - HC - Income Tax

Exemption under Section 10B - Establishment or revival of a new Export Oriented Unit - Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee company had established a new Export Oriented Unit which was not a revival or reconstruction of the old unit disregarding the facts narrated by the Assessing Officer? - Held that - The orders passed by the Commissioner as well as by the Tribunal were thus based on the order passed by the Tribunal for the assessment year 1994-95 and there are no materials placed before this Court to contend that the assessee had violated the conditions of licence, thereby disentitling the assessee to have the benefit of deduction under Section 10B of the Act - Decided against Revenue.

Summary

Issues:
1. Entitlement to exemption under Section 10B for an assessee engaged in executing job work for foreign companies without exporting any articles or software.
2. Eligibility for exemption under Section 10B despite not exercising the option for certain assessment years.
3. Recognition of a new Export Oriented Unit (EOU) by disregarding the Assessing Officer's view.

Analysis:
1. The judgment concerns Tax Case Appeals filed by the Revenue against the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal's orders for various assessment years. The primary issue was the entitlement of an assessee, engaged in job work for foreign companies without exporting goods or software, to exemption under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act. The Tribunal held in favor of the assessee, allowing the exemption. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, emphasizing the lack of evidence to disqualify the assessee from the exemption.

2. Another issue raised was the eligibility of the assessee for exemption under Section 10B despite not exercising the option for certain assessment years. The Court examined the history of the assessee's operations and the relevant approvals obtained for establishing a new EOU. The Commissioner and Tribunal had previously allowed the assessee's claim for exemption, which was consistent with the recognition of the new EOU. The Court affirmed the decision, noting the absence of material to challenge the assessee's compliance with the conditions for exemption.

3. Additionally, the judgment addressed the question of whether the assessee had genuinely established a new EOU, distinct from any revival or reconstruction of an old unit. The Court reviewed the details provided by the assessee, including approvals and compliance with EOU requirements. The Commissioner and Tribunal had found in favor of the assessee, recognizing the establishment of a new EOU. The Court, considering the finality of previous orders and the lack of contradictory evidence, upheld the Tribunal's decision, dismissing the Revenue's appeals for the relevant assessment years.

In conclusion, the Court affirmed the Tribunal's orders, dismissing the Tax Case Appeals filed by the Revenue. The judgment highlighted the importance of compliance with EOU regulations and the lack of grounds to challenge the assessee's eligibility for exemption under Section 10B based on the available evidence and previous decisions.