9911796707
TMI Blog2020 (1) TMI 985X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he Tribunal order because ground no. 5.4 raised by the assessee in respect of deduction claimed by the assessee u/s. 10B of the IT Act on the manufacturing services carried out by the assessee was not decided specifically and this ground was dismissed in spite of this finding in para no. 29 of the Tribunal order that ratification by the Board relates back to the date of actual grant of permission. Hence, we recall this Tribunal order for Assessment Year 2009-10 for limited purpose for deciding ground no. 5.4 of this appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10. Appeal of the revenue for Assessment Year 2011-12 was decided in favour of the revenue simply on this basis that in assessee s appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10, the issue regarding deduc ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... for the sake of convenience. 2. First, we take up the M.P. for Assessment Year 2009-10 i.e. M.P. No. 108/Bang/2019. In this M.P., this is the contention raised by the assessee that the assessee s claim for deduction u/s. 10B of the IT Act with regard to manufacture activities was rejected by the AO on the ground that the Board s ratification to the permission granted by Development Commissioner is given on 18.01.2011 and therefore, the same would be effective only from Financial Year 2011-12 and hence it does not apply to Assessment Year 2009-10. In para no. 5.2 of this M.P., it is stated by the assessee that as per para 29 of the impugned Tribunal order, it is held by the Tribunal that once permission has been granted by the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... is as under. 29. With respect to the ratification by the Board giving effect from 31.08.2004, in our view, there should not be any quarrel as the issue stands covered in, favour of the assessee by the authoritative pronouncement by the Board. In our view, initial permission is required to be granted by the DC in accordance with the Rules framed for the purpose of Section 2. Once the said permission has been granted then the ratification by the Board is merely a formality and therefore would relate back to the date of actual grant, as the assessee cannot be permitted to wait till eternity, if there is a delay / latch on the part of the Board for not ratifying within the time sanctioned by the DC. 5. We also reproduce ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... order for Assessment Year 2009-10 for limited purpose for deciding ground no. 5.4 of this appeal for Assessment Year 2009-10. 7. Now we take up the second M.P. filed by the assessee for Assessment Year 2011-12 in M.P. No. 109/Bang/2019. In this M.P., this is the only contention raised that in this year, the claim of the assessee was only for deduction u/s. 10B with regard to manufacturing activities and since it is already held by the Tribunal in para 29 of the Tribunal order that Board ratification relates back to the date of actual grant by DC, this issue should be decided in favour of the assessee. On page no. 53 of the impugned Tribunal order, this appeal was dismissed by the Tribunal by simply following the Tribunal orde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
