9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2012 (6) TMI 264 - HC - Income TaxTribunal remitting the issue of claim of deduction u/s 10B to the file of the AO Tribunal stated that CIT(A) has not followed the requirement of Rule 46A - assessee contested that all details have been furnished to the AO who was also given an opportunity in the course of appellate proceedings before the CIT(A) Held that - The documents that were placed before the CIT(A) related to Form 56G and the documents pertaining to local sale and export sale a certificate granted by the Export Commissioner as regards the separate location of the export unit - in the course of the appeal before the CIT(A) details in support of the various columns in Form 56G were placed before the Assessing Authority for his remarks and report - the order of the Tribunal shows that there is hardly any reference as to the fresh material which went unnoticed or which had not been placed before the Officer for offering his comments absolute compliance of the provisions of Rule 46A (3)no justification in granting the order of remand - in favour of assessee.
Issues:
- Claim of deduction under Section 10B - Remand of assessment by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Compliance with Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 Claim of deduction under Section 10B: The appellant, a company engaged in the manufacture of food products, claimed relief under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act for the first time in the assessment years 2006-07 and 2007-08. The Assessing Officer disallowed the claim, citing reasons such as the factory operating from the same place as the original unit and lack of separate books of accounts for local and export sales. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) found that the appellant had furnished necessary details and maintained separate turnover for EOU and DTA units. The Appellate Authority upheld the claim, stating that all conditions for exemption under Section 10B were satisfied, and allowed the appeal. Remand of assessment by Income Tax Appellate Tribunal: The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, despite acknowledging that the Revenue had sufficient opportunity to provide a report on the materials submitted by the appellant, remanded the assessment back to the Assessing Authority. This remand was based on the Tribunal's view that Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 had not been followed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). However, the High Court found no justification for this remand, especially since all issues raised by the appellant were already placed before the Assessing Authority during the appeal proceedings. The Court deemed the remand unnecessary and set aside the Tribunal's order. Compliance with Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962: Rule 46A of the Income Tax Rules, 1962 deals with the production of additional evidence before the Deputy Commissioner (Appeals) and Commissioner (Appeals). The High Court noted that the documents submitted by the appellant were related to Form 56G and the location of the export unit, which were duly verified by the Assessing Officer. The Court found that the requirements of Rule 46A were met, as the Assessing Officer had examined the evidence and filed a report before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). Therefore, the Court concluded that there was no further ground for the Revenue to insist on remand, as compliance with the rule was evident. In conclusion, the High Court set aside the Tribunal's order of remand, as it found no justification for the reassessment and allowed the appeals in favor of the appellant, with no costs incurred.
|
