2016 (11) TMI 1596 - AT - Income Tax

Disallowance u/s 10A - splitting up or reconstruction of the existing unit - Held that - For the assessment year 2007-08 the CIT(A) has examined the Business Transfer Agreement and found that there was no case of splitting up or reconstruction of the existing unit and allowed the claim of the assessee u/s 10A of the Act. However, both the CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer have not considered the CBDT Circular No.1 of 2013 while deciding the issue. Therefore, we set aside the orders of the lower authorities for both the assessment years under consideration and remit the matter back to the Assessing Officer to examine the case in the light of CBDT Circular No.1 of 2013 and decide on merits after giving due opportunity to the assessee. - Appeals of the Revenue are allowed for statistical purposes.

Summary

Issues Involved:
- Disallowance made under section 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961.
- Interpretation of Business Transfer Agreement and its implications on claiming deduction under section 10A.
- Consideration of CBDT Circular No.1 of 2013 in deciding the eligibility for deduction under section 10A.

Analysis:
1. The judgment pertains to appeals by the Revenue against orders of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) for assessment years 2007-08 and 2010-11 concerning disallowances under section 10A of the Income-tax Act, 1961. The Appellate Tribunal decided to address the common issue in both appeals through a single order for convenience.

2. The primary issue revolved around the disallowance made under section 10A. The case involved the transfer of assets through a Business Transfer Agreement by the assessee-company and the subsequent claim for deduction under section 10A.

3. The Assessing Officer disallowed the exemption claimed by the assessee, citing the transfer as a mere split up or reconstruction of the existing unit, hence ineligible for section 10A deduction. The Assessing Officer's disallowance amounted to ?64,71,046 for the assessment year 2007-08 and ?7,30,24,799 for the assessment year 2010-11.

4. The assessee appealed to the CIT(A), who allowed the claim by emphasizing that the entire assets of the undertaking were transferred to the assessee on a lock, stock, and barrel basis, refuting the Assessing Officer's stance on splitting up or reconstruction.

5. The Department raised a ground contending that the CIT(A) did not consider CBDT Circular No.1 of 2013. The Tribunal, upon review, found that both the CIT(A) and the Assessing Officer had not considered the circular while deciding the issue. Consequently, the Tribunal remitted the matter back to the Assessing Officer to re-examine the case in light of the circular and decide on merits after providing the assessee with a fair opportunity.

6. Ultimately, the Tribunal allowed the appeals of the Revenue for statistical purposes, setting aside the orders of the lower authorities and remitting the matter back to the Assessing Officer for reconsideration in accordance with CBDT Circular No.1 of 2013.

This detailed analysis encapsulates the key aspects and outcomes of the legal judgment concerning the disallowance under section 10A and the interpretation of the Business Transfer Agreement in the context of claiming deductions under the Income-tax Act, 1961.