9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (12) TMI 1552X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... instance received the foreign exchange and in turn transmit it. Rather than a per se rejection of such transaction what is essential for the AO in each case to decide whether the third party was beneficiary to the transaction and received any amount all out of such proceeds. Thus such as attachment order and exercise of banks lien etc. amount may not be actually received into the assessee’s account or received by it at all. In such cases too, it cannot be claimed that unless the amounts actually are received by the assessee would not qualify for benefit under Section 10B. Whether unlike under Section 80HHC where the benefit of deduction is available even to a third party but one who facilitates the manufacturer by an exporter from which ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act is whether in the circumstances of the case, the export income reported by the assessee for AY 2008-2009, and brought to tax to the extent of ₹ 1,52,51,935/- by the AO on the basis that the terms of Section10B were not applied, is correct. 2. The assessee had reported export turnover and claimed deduction under Section 10B to the tune of ₹ 9,64,64,001/-. In scrutiny assessment the AO determined that the assessee had made only local sales to sister concern M/s Stone world to the tune of ₹ 4,03,66,362/-. It was held that Section 10B deduction available to 100% export oriented undertakings. The assessee s claim rejected on three counts; firstly that the assessee itself ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... . 5. In Tata Elxsi Ltd s case (supra), the issue involved was domestic sales but treated as deemed export within STP zone. Undoubtedly, the sale transaction was between two authorised STP entities the purchaser apparently was status holder itself entitled to export. However, the ratio in this court s opinion is not based only upon those facts alone. The court, in fact, concluded that Section 10B and its various sub-sections which spelt out the conditions are to be construed liberally rather than a grammatical liberal sense. The court held in the context of facts of the case (since that claim for deduction there was under Section 10A) that: 20. From the aforesaid provisions, it is clear that if a assessee wants to claim the b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tances, beyond control of the assessee such as attachment order and exercise of banks lien etc. amount may not be actually received into the assessee s account or received by it at all. In such cases too, it cannot be claimed that unless the amounts actually are received by the assessee would not qualify for benefit under Section 10B. 7. It was lastly argued that unlike under Section 80HHC where the benefit of deduction is available even to a third party but one who facilitates the manufacturer by an exporter from which earnings are reported, (termed as supporting manufacturer ) Section 10B makes no similar provision. It is argued that this ipso fact excluded in its application amounts that could be received or receivable by third party ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
