9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (4) TMI 781X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ebbs Technology Pvt Ltd (GTPL), one of the group concerns of GHSPL engaged in the business of carrying on BPO and IT related services, demerged its BPO operations w.e.f. 01.04.2007 vide Hon ble Bombay High Court Order dt. 11.03.2008. The assesee had filed its predemerger return of income on 30.09.2008 declaring total business loss of ₹ 19,876/-. Since as per order of Bombay High Court demerger was w.e.f. 01.04.2007, accordingly, the assesee revised its return of income on 24.03.2009 after giving effect to the demerger, declaring income at Rs. Nil and after claiming exemption u/s 10B amounting to ₹ 3,29,65,103/-. It was submitted before AO that assesee prior to demerger, GTPL had commenced its manufacturing in 2002-03 and had cla ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion u/s 10B is allowable to any undertaking for the assessment year beginning on 1st day of April, 2011 and subsequent years. The appellant further submitted that prior to demerger GTL has commenced manufacturing activities during previous year 2002-03 and claimed deduction u/s 10B from A.Y. 2003-04 onwards and the same was disallowed by the A.O. However, on appeal by the appellant, the CIT(A) decided the issue in favour of the appellant. The department filed an appeal against the said order before the Tribunal. The department filed an appeal against the said order before the Tribunal. The Tribunal dismissed the department/s appeal and upheld the CIT(A) s order and allowed the claim u/s 10B by a consolidated order of ITAT dated 13.10.2010 f ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in section 10B, deduction of the same should be allowed. 3. After considering the submission and perusing the material on record CIT(A) found that on similar facts deduction has already been allowed in earlier years, therefore the deduction is allowable for year under consideration also, accordingly, AO was directed to allow the deduction u/s 10B as claimed. Now the department is in appeal here before Tribunal. Ld. DR firstly placed reliance on the order of AO it was further submitted that Job work charge deduction is not allowable. Attention of the Bench was drawn on provision of section 10B(A)(3) of the Act. On the other hand, ld. AR of the assesee placed reliance on the order of CIT(A). Copy of order of the Tribunal for earlier year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
