9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (12) TMI 968X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction 115JB refers to the amount of expenditure incurred for earning exempt income which has to be added back to the profit as per P&L A/c for the purpose of calculation of book profits u/s 115JB – the order of the FAA is upheld – Decided against revenue. Disallowance on deduction u/s 80IAB deleted – income from sale of business treated as capital gain – Held that:- As decided in assessee’s own case it has been held that deduction u/s 80IA of the Act cannot be denied after having been granted in the first year of claim, as the restraint of Section 80 IA(3) cannot be re-adjudicated in the subsequent AYs without withdrawing or disturbing the claim which was allowed in the initial AY – Decided against revenue. - ITA No. 4435/Del/2013, ITA ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... return of income declaring total income of ₹ 64,96,96,806/- on 14.10.2010. Subsequently, the assessee has revised its return of income on 29.3.2012 declaring gross total income of ₹ 64,96,96,806/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and as against the total returned income of ₹ 17,86,09,995/-, the assessment has been completed u/s 143(3) of the Act at the returned income. In the assessee s case, liability of income tax has been determined under MAT on book profits as per provision of s.115 JB of the Act. The AO has recalculated the book profit of ₹ 4,77,58,35,744/- by making an addition of ₹ 4,73,70,13,878/- on account of income received from operation and maintenance of SEZ to the book profit of ₹ ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... claimed by the appellant, therefore, the audit report in Form 10CCB was not required to be file along with the return of income. The appellant has claimed that its only source of income is income from operation and maintenance of SEZ projects. The appellant has contended that the operation of section l15JB(6) of the Income Tax Act is independent of the provisions contained in the section 80IAB of the Income Tax Act. The provisions of section l15JB (6) clearly state that the provisions of section l15JB shall not apply to the income accrued or arising on or after the 1st day of April, 2005 from any business carried on, or services rendered, by an entrepreneur or a developer in a unit or special economic zone as the case may be. In this way ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 2 for the AY 2008-09 and 2009-10 vide order dt. 24.01.2014 has adjudicated the issue in favour of the assessee. At para 13 it was held as follows. 13. Regarding ground No. 2 in assessment year 2009-10 we find that the provisions of clause (g) to section 115JB refers to the amount of expenditure incurred for earning exempt income which has to be added back to the profit as per P L A/c for the purpose of calculation of book profits u/s 115JB. However, we further find that for the purpose of making addition of such expenses to profits for the purpose of section 115J8 first requirement is that amount of expenditure should have been debited in the P L A/c. This requirement is contained in the section itself. In the present case, the disallow ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ment year 2001-02. Since the expenditure incurred has not been identified and no nexus has been established with the dividend income, the expenditure could not be disallowed under clause (f) of the Explanation. As per the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Apollo Tyres Ltd. the Assessing Officer is not entitled to tinker with the book profits as determined as per provisions of Company's Act unless the amount is specified in clauses (a) to (h) of the Explanation. The amount of Rs..88,290/- has not been established to have nexus with the dividend income. The amount of ₹ 88,290/- has been estimated at 1% of the income. In our view no disallowance could be made. Accordingly, we direct the AO to delete the amount of & ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on of ₹ 2,30,62,92,834/- u/s 80 IAB of the Act. In the assessment order passed for the year under consideration, the AO disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee u/s 80 IAB of the Act amounting to ₹ 2,30,62,92,834/- for developing special economic zone at Hyderabad. The assessee submitted that the issues under apepal has been considered and allowed to it in earlier year i.e. AY 2009-10 in appeal no.292/11-12 vide appellate order dt. 15.2.2013. A copy of the appellate roder has also been filed to substantiate the fact that the issue is covered. It has been stated that the facts and circumstances are exactly the same as in earlier year and the matter is squarely covered by orders for AY 2009-10 as mentioned above. It is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
