2012 (4) TMI 343 - AT - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 10A - SEZ unit - outsourced job work activities - held that - It is immaterial that whether the work was done by the assessee inside or the outside the SEZ, once the assessee located in SEZ, the assssee is eligible for deduction u/s 10A irrespective of the fact that the work was done inside or outside the SEZ Decided in favor of the assessee by way of remand to AO. Regarding interest income charged under the head income from other sources - deduction u/s 10A - held that - Since the issue under consideration is identical to the case of the assessee in AY 2002-03, respectfully following that decision, we uphold the order of the CIT(A) and dismiss the ground raised by the assessee. However, we direct the AO if assessee incurred any expenses to earn the income, the same may be verified and allowed in view of the section 57(iii) of the Act. Regarding inter-unit transfer - AO noticed that the assessee had not considered inter-unit transfer as a part of total turnover Held that the AO has not brought any material on record to show that whether the assessee filed appeal before the Tribunal or not in AY 2002-03. Decided in favor of the assessee by way of remand to AO Regarding deduction u/s 14A of the Act - AO noticed that the assessee had total funds available including loan funds were Rs. 55.59 crores as on 31/03/2003, which included loan funds of Rs. 24.34 crores - Held that similar issue arose before the Tribunal in assessee s case for AY 2002-03 Decided in favor of the assessee by way of remand to AO

Issues Involved:
1. Deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act.
2. Treatment of interest income as 'income from other sources.'
3. Inclusion of inter-unit transfers in total turnover.
4. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act.
5. Deduction under Section 10A for sales tax refund.
6. Alternate claim regarding disallowance under Section 14A affecting Section 10A deduction.

Issue-wise Detailed Analysis:

1. Deduction under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act:
The primary issue is whether the assessee is entitled to a deduction under Section 10A for profits derived from export activities, considering a significant portion of the manufacturing process was outsourced to entities outside the SEZ. The AO denied the deduction, arguing that manufacturing must occur within the SEZ. The CIT(A) upheld this view, emphasizing that the statute's plain meaning requires manufacturing within the SEZ. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the AO for re-examination, directing the assessee to provide detailed information on the manufacturing processes conducted within and outside the SEZ.

2. Treatment of Interest Income as 'Income from Other Sources':
The AO classified interest income as 'income from other sources,' thus excluding it from the Section 10A deduction. The CIT(A) upheld this classification, following the Tribunal's earlier decision in the assessee's case for AY 2002-03. The Tribunal, referencing the Supreme Court decision in Liberty India, confirmed that interest income should be treated as 'income from other sources' and not netted off against other incomes. However, the Tribunal allowed for verification and deduction of any expenses incurred to earn this interest under Section 57(iii).

3. Inclusion of Inter-Unit Transfers in Total Turnover:
The AO included inter-unit transfers in the total turnover for calculating the Section 10A deduction, a decision upheld by the CIT(A) based on the previous year's assessment. The Tribunal remanded the issue to the AO to re-evaluate based on the outcome of the Tribunal's decision for AY 2002-03, directing the AO to follow the final decision if no appeal was filed against the CIT(A)'s order for that year.

4. Disallowance under Section 14A of the Income Tax Act:
The AO disallowed Rs. 37,26,026/- under Section 14A, attributing it to interest on investments and loans made without interest from borrowed funds. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, referencing the previous year's decision. The Tribunal, following the jurisdictional High Court's decision in Godrej & Boyce Mfg. Co. Ltd., remanded the issue to the AO to recompute the disallowance in line with the High Court's guidelines.

5. Deduction under Section 10A for Sales Tax Refund:
The AO denied the deduction for sales tax refund under Section 10A, citing insufficient evidence that the refund pertained to the SEZ unit. The CIT(A) directed the AO to verify the claim and allow the deduction if the refund was indeed from the SEZ unit. The Tribunal upheld this directive, remanding the issue for verification and appropriate action.

6. Alternate Claim Regarding Disallowance under Section 14A Affecting Section 10A Deduction:
The assessee contended that the disallowance under Section 14A should be added back to the income eligible for Section 10A deduction. The CIT(A) agreed, directing the AO to verify and adjust the deduction accordingly. The Tribunal found no infirmity in this approach and upheld the CIT(A)'s order, dismissing the revenue's appeal on this ground.

Conclusion:
Both the assessee's and the revenue's appeals were partly allowed for statistical purposes, with several issues remanded to the AO for re-examination and verification in accordance with legal guidelines and previous Tribunal decisions. The Tribunal emphasized the need for detailed documentation and compliance with statutory provisions in determining the eligibility for deductions under Section 10A and other related sections.

← Previous Next →