9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (1) TMI 85 - HC - Income TaxValidity of revision order passed u/s 263 - Held that - Though Section 80HHC and 80IA are independent of each other, the deductions to the extent of such profits and gains shall in no case exceed the profits and gains of such eligible business of undertaking or enterprises - It was not open to the A.O. to allow deduction to the extent of 100% of the profits and gains of the eligible business - The Commissioner had rightly found that the A.O. had erred in allowing the deduction under Section 80IA on the reducing balance after deduction under Section 80HHC - The Commissioner acted within his jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961 to revise the order - Following Joint Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mandideep Eng. & Pkg. Ind. (P) Ltd. 2006 (4) TMI 75 - SUPREME Court - The Ao shall allow deduction under section 80HHC and 80IA while keeping in view of the restrictions of Section 80IA (9) of the Act - The issue was restored for fresh adjudication.
Issues:
Assessment under Section 143(3)/148 for the assessment year 2000-01, erroneous allowance of deductions under Section 80HHC and 80IA, jurisdiction of Commissioner under Section 263, interpretation of Section 80IA(9), setting aside of assessment order by Commissioner, correctness of Tribunal's decision. Analysis: The High Court addressed the issue of an assessment completed by the Assessing Officer under Section 143(3)/148 for the assessment year 2000-01, where deductions under Section 80HHC and 80IA were allowed erroneously. The Commissioner of Income Tax-II set aside the assessment order under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, as it was found to be prejudicial to the interest of revenue due to the erroneous allowance of deductions. The Tribunal, however, allowed the appeal, stating that if two views are possible, the powers under Section 263 could not be invoked. The Tribunal relied on the decision in CIT v. Max India Limited, emphasizing that in such cases, the order could not be considered prejudicial to the revenue's interest. The High Court examined the question of whether deductions under Section 80HHC and 80IA are independent of each other. It was argued that while they are independent, the deductions cannot exceed the profits and gains of the eligible business. The Court referred to the Supreme Court judgment in Joint Commissioner of Income Tax v. Mandideep Eng. & PKG. Ind. (P) Ltd., clarifying that the deductions should not surpass the profits and gains of the eligible business. Furthermore, the High Court considered the interpretation of Section 80IA(9), which restricts the allowance of deductions to the profits and gains of the eligible business. The Court disagreed with the Tribunal's decision to set aside the order under Section 263, stating that the Assessing Officer had erred in allowing deductions under Section 80IA on the reducing balance after deductions under Section 80HHC. The Commissioner's revision of the order was deemed appropriate within the jurisdiction under Section 263. In conclusion, the High Court remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to frame a fresh order considering the deductions under Section 80HHC and 80IA in compliance with the restrictions of Section 80IA(9) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The income tax appeal was partially allowed, emphasizing the need for a fresh assessment order in line with the legal provisions and judicial interpretations.
|
