9911796707
|
Home
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2014 (3) TMI 68 - AT - Income TaxDisallowance of exemption u/s 10B of the Act Scrap sales Incremental turnover & connectivity incentive Subsidy from government - Interest income - - Other income - Exchange rate of fluctuation - Held that - The decision in Maral Overseas Ltd. Versus Additional Commissioner of Income-tax, Range 5, Indore 2012 (4) TMI 345 - ITAT INDORE followed - Once an income forms part of the business of the income of the eligible undertaking of the assessee, the same cannot be excluded from the eligible profits for the purpose of computing deduction u/s 10B of the Act. As per the computation made by the Assessing Officer himself, there is no dispute that both these incomes have been treated by the Assessing Officer as business income thus, the matter remitted back to the AO for fresh adjudication Decided in favour of Revenue.
Issues involved:
1. Disallowance of exemption u/s.10B of the IT Act on the amount of scrap sales. 2. Difference in the language of provisions of Section 80IB(3) & Section 10B(4) for deduction. 3. Eligibility of government subsidy and interest income for exemption u/s.10B. 4. Deletion of penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c). Issue 1: Disallowance of exemption u/s.10B on scrap sales: The Revenue appealed against the deletion of the addition of Rs.28,62,448/- made on account of disallowance of exemption u/s.10B of the IT Act on the amount of scrap sales. The AO disallowed the exemption on various incomes including scrap sales based on a show cause notice. The CIT(A) upheld the disallowance of interest income and government subsidy but allowed the exemption on scrap sales. The Tribunal referred to the Special Bench decision in Maral Overseas Ltd and directed the AO to verify the correctness of the claim and allow the deduction as per law, considering the entire profit of the business without requiring a direct nexus. Issue 2: Difference in provisions of Section 80IB(3) & Section 10B(4) for deduction: The assessee's appeal raised concerns regarding the CIT(A) not appreciating the difference in language between Section 80IB(3) & Section 10B(4) for deduction. The AR argued that the Special Bench decision clarified that the entire profit of the business should be considered for the claim of deduction u/s.10B without requiring a direct nexus. The Tribunal agreed and restored the issue to the AO for reconsideration in line with the Special Bench decision. Issue 3: Eligibility of government subsidy and interest income for exemption u/s.10B: The assessee contested the CIT(A)'s decision on the eligibility of government subsidy and interest income for exemption u/s.10B. The AR cited the Special Bench decision in Maral Overseas Ltd and another Tribunal order to support the claim for exemption. The Tribunal observed that the issue was debatable and restored it to the AO for reconsideration based on the Special Bench verdict. Issue 4: Deletion of penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c): The Revenue challenged the deletion of penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) by the CIT(A). The Tribunal noted that since the issue of quantum had been restored to the AO for reconsideration, the concealment penalty did not survive and should be decided based on the final outcome of the issue by the AO. Consequently, the penalty ground raised by the Revenue was dismissed. In conclusion, the Tribunal referred to various legal precedents and directed the issues to be reconsidered by the AO in light of the Special Bench decision, allowing both the Revenue's appeal and the assessee's appeal for statistical purposes only. The penalty levied u/s.271(1)(c) was dismissed as it did not survive due to the restoration of the quantum issue.
|
