9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2020 (3) TMI 967 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 10A - alternate remedy under Section 10A which says that if the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s 10B then, deduction should be considered under Section 10A of the Act alternatively - HELD THAT - It is seen that the appeal was admitted on 19.06.2018. When the matter is called today, the learned Counsel for the appellant as well as the learned Counsel for the respondent produced the order copy dated 26.07.2019 passed by the Tribunal in the original appeal by which the appeal itself has been disposed of holding that the claim of deduction under Section 10A for the assessment year 2006-07 is already remitted back. Since the order of the Tribunal has been acted upon, this Court confirms the order 2017 (8) TMI 1597 - ITAT CHENNAI in 2019 (7) TMI 1587 - ITAT CHENNAI - Questions of law framed is kept open.
Issues:
Appeal against the order recalling the earlier Tribunal decision in a tax case involving deduction under Section 10B and 10A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2006-07. Analysis: The case involved an appeal against the order recalling the earlier Tribunal decision in a tax case related to the deduction under Section 10B and 10A of the Income Tax Act for the assessment year 2006-07. The assessee, engaged in providing BPO solutions, initially filed a return of income for &8377; 60,37,272/-, later revised to &8377; 80,22,796/-. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) with an income of &8377; 2,89,97,211/- after allowing deductions under Section 10B. Subsequently, the Assessing Officer reopened the assessment under Section 147 due to lack of Board approval for claiming Section 10B deduction. The assessment was completed under Section 143(3) rws 147, withdrawing the Section 10B benefit. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) confirmed this decision, leading the assessee to appeal to the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. The Tribunal remanded the matter to the Assessing Officer to consider the eligibility for deduction under Section 10A as an alternate remedy, as no other grounds were urged. The appellant filed a petition to recall this order, claiming all grounds were raised, but the Tribunal mistakenly noted otherwise. The petition was allowed, prompting the appellant to file the present appeal. The High Court noted that the appeal was admitted and observed that the Tribunal had disposed of the original appeal by remitting the claim of deduction under Section 10A back for the assessment year 2006-07. The High Court confirmed the Tribunal's order and kept the questions of law framed open. In conclusion, the High Court disposed of the appeal with no costs, confirming the Tribunal's decision to remit the claim of deduction under Section 10A back for the assessment year 2006-07. The Court maintained that the questions of law framed were kept open for further consideration.
|
