9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (3) TMI 1025X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he reopening done u/s.147 of the Act for the impugned assessment year. 3. Recapitulating the facts, ld. Authorised Representative submitted that assessee had filed the original return on 16.10.2007 disclosing total income of D1,86,489/- after claiming deduction of D45,06,462/- u/s.10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short ''the Act''). As per the ld. Authorised Representative, original return was processed u/s.143(1) of the Act. Thereafter, as per the ld. Authorised Representative notice dated 27.03.2014 under section 148 of the Act to the assessee seeking to reopen the assessment. As per the ld. Authorised Representative reason for reopening was mentioned as allowance of deduction u/s.10B of the Act, when it was not eligible for such dedu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t ought have been granted deduction u/s.10A of the Act for which it was eligible. According to him, ld. Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) had erroneously relied on the judgment of Apex Court in the case of CIT vs. Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd, 198 ITR 297 for denying the claim preferred by the assessee. As per the ld. Authorised Representative, judgment of Apex Court in the case of Sun Engineering Works (P) Ltd (supra) applied only where there was an original assessment. In assessee's case, the original return having been processed u/s.143(1) of the Act, as per the ld. Authorised Representative impugned assessment had to be considered as original assessment. In any case, according to him, by virtue of judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... erred the claim u/s.10A of the Act and not under 10B, when it filed return a pursuant to notice u/s.148 of the Act. In my opinion when original return was only subject to a processing u/s.143(1) of the Act, the assessment done pursuant to a reassessment proceeding, initiated u/s.147 of the Act, has to be considered as the first assessment. There is no case for the Revenue that return filed by the assessee pursuant to notice u/s.148 of the Act, was beyond the time allowed to it sub section (1) thereof. In my opinion nothing stopped the assessee to make a claim u/s.10A of the Act in the return filed pursuant to notice u/s.148 of the Act. It is not akin to a case where an assessment was originally completed after scrutiny u/s.143(3) of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... on the judgment of Hon'ble Jurisdictional High Court in the case of Heartland KG Information Ltd (supra) where it was held as under at para 6: "6. As far as the first question raised as regards the claim of the assessee originally made under section 10B of the Income-tax Act is concerned, we do not think, the said question can be answered in favour of the Revenue. A reading of the order of the Assessing Officer as well as the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) shows that even though the assessee originally claimed relief under section 10B, it was cautious enough to make an alternative plea under section 10A in view of the fact that the assessee's vendor had the benefit under section 10A. It is not denied by the Revenue that the ass ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
