9911796707
TMI Blog2018 (9) TMI 1551X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... was no specific direction by the Administrative CIT while passing his order u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. Therefore, the issue on merits ought to have been adjudicated by the A.O. as well as CIT(A) de hors the observation of the Administrative CIT. Thus additional ground is admitted and taken on record - matter needs to be examined by the CIT(A) afresh. - ITA No.109/Coch/2018 - - - Dated:- 18-9-2018 - Shri Chandra Poojari, AM And Shri George George K, JM For The Appellant : Sri.Raghunathan S. For The Respondent : Sri.Santham Bose ORDER Per George George K., JM This appeal at the instance of the assessee is directed against CIT(Appeals) s order dated 31.01.2018. The relevant assessment year is 2006-2007. 2. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... came infructuous and doesn't require further action to be taken so as to decide the fate of the appeal filed on 02.02.2012. As a result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed for statistical purpose. 4. Aggrieved by the CIT(A) s order, the assessee has filed this appeal raising the following grounds:- The grounds stated hereunder are independent of, and without prejudice to one another. The Appellant submits as under: Ground No.1 - Erroneous reliance on the order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. 1.1 On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) ('CIT(A)') has erroneously placed reliance on the order dated 20 March 2012 passed by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of the Act and consequently, upholding the disallowance of INR 4,062,940 from the deduction under Section 10B pertaining to unbilled revenue. 2.2 On facts and in circumstances of the case, the learned CIT(A) has erred in upholding the disallowance made by the AO on the ground that the export proceeds relating to unbilled revenue have not been realized within the time stipulated in the Act, despite the Appellant having realized the same within the time period prescribed by the competent authority as stipulated under Section 10B(3) of the Act read with Explanation 1 thereto. 2.3 The learned CIT(A) failed to consider that as per Section 10B(3) of the Act and Explanation thereto, export proceeds are to be repatriated to India, withi ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at parity to be maintained between export turnover and total turnover Without prejudice to the other grounds of appeal, the Assessing Officer failed to consider the principle of parity issue as upheld by the Hon'ble Supreme court in CIT v BCL Technologies Ltd (2018) 93 taxmann.com 33 (SC) and failed to consider that what does not constitute as export in the current financial year 2005-06, as the invoices were made in the subsequent financial year 2006-07, cannot form part of the total turnover while computing the deduction under section 10B of the Act. 4.2 The learned AR representing the assessee relied on the grounds raised. It was further submitted by the learned AR that the additional ground raised is a pure question of l ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... h law after giving a reasonable opportunity to the assessee. 5.1 In view of the above order of the ITAT, we are of the view that there was no specific direction by the Administrative CIT while passing his order u/s 263 of the I.T.Act. Therefore, the issue on merits ought to have been adjudicated by the A.O. as well as CIT(A) de hors the observation of the Administrative CIT. 5.2 Moreover, we find that the additional ground raised is a pure legal issue which does not require fresh examination of facts. The additional ground raised is important and goes to the root of the issue. In the interest of justice and substantial cause the additional ground is admitted and taken on record. Since the CIT(A) had not decided the issue on merit ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
