The ITO, Ward-4(1), Ahmedabad V. Gateway Technolabs Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad

ITA 1230/AHD/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5641 (ITAT-AHMEDABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 2 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 09-07-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Next Hearing Date: 02-07-2010
• Assessment Year: 2007-2008
• Appeal Filed On: 20-04-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHELLEY JINDAL
• Assessee Lawyers: M J SHAH
• Section: 143(3); 10B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH AHMEDABAD (BEFORE S/SHRI BHAVNESH SAINI, JM AND D. C. AGRAWAL , AM) ITA NO.1230/AHD/2010 A.Y.: 2007-08 THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, WARD-4(1), NAVJIVAN TRUST BUILDING, OFF. ASHRAM ROAD, AHMEDABAD VS M/S. GATEWAY TECHNOLABS PVT. LTD., B-81, CORPORATE HOUSE, JUDGES BUNGLOOW ROAD, S. G. HIGHWAY, BODAKDEV AHMEDABAD PA NO AABCG 4206C (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY SHRI SHELLEY JINDAL, DR RESPONDENT BY SHRI M. J. SHAH, AR O R D E R PER BHAVNESH SAINI: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE LEARNED CIT(A)-VIII, AHMED ABAD DATED 13 TH JANUARY,2010 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08 ON THE FOL LOWING GROUNDS: 1. THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS ENTITLED TO DEDUCTION U/S. 10 B OF THE ACT. 1.1 THE LD. CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN NOT APPRECIATING THE FACT THAT THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FUL FILLED THE ELIGIBILITY CONDITIONS FOR DEDUCTION U/S. 10B O F THE ACT AND THEREFORE, THE ASSESSING OFFICER WAS RIGHT IN HOLDING THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED TO DEDUCT ION U/S. 80B OF THE ACT. 2. BRIEFLY, THE FACTS OF THE CASE ARE THAT THE ASSE SSEE IS A PRIVATE LIMITED COMPANY ENGAGED IN DEVELOPMENT OF SOFTWARE AND ITS EXPORT. THE ASSESSEE FILED ITS ORIGINAL RETURN OF INCOME FOR TH E RELEVANT PERIOD ITA NO.1230/AHD/2010 ITO- 4(1), AHMEDABAD VS M/S. GATEWAY TECHNOLABS PVT . LTD., AHMEDABAD 2 DECLARING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.18,31,630/- AFTER CLAI MING DEDUCTION U/S 10B OF THE IT ACT AMOUNTING TO RS.12,14,73,296/-. T HE ASSESSMENT IN THIS CASE WAS COMPLETED U/S 143(3) OF THE IT ACT DE TERMINING TOTAL INCOME AT RS.12,33,04,926/- WHEREIN THE AO REJECTED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 10 B OF THE IT ACT. THE AO ASKED THE ASSESSEE TO JUSTIFY THE CLAIM U/S 10 B OF THE IT ACT KEEPING IN VIEW DISALLOWANCE MADE IN THE EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEARS 2003-04 TO 200 6-07. IT WAS SUBMITTED THAT THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ALLOWED DEDUC TION U/S 10 B OF THE IT ACT AND ALL THE ORDERS OF THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAV E BEEN CONFIRMED BY THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH. THE AO, HOWEVER, REJECTED TH E CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BECAUSE THE DEPARTMENT HAS PREFERRED APPEA L BEFORE THE HONBLE HIGH COURT. THE ASSESSEE REITERATED THE SAM E SUBMISSIONS BEFORE THE LEARNED CIT(A). THE LEARNED CIT(A) CONSIDERING THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE ASSESSEE NOTED THAT THE ITAT, AHMEDABAD BENCH IN TH E CASE OF THE SAME ASSESSEE IN ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 ALLOWED THE CLA IM OF THE ASSESSEE U/S 10B OF THE IT ACT AND IT WAS ALSO HELD THAT CLA IM IS NOT DIFFERENT. THE LEARNED CIT(A) FOLLOWING THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL FOR THE EARLIER YEARS ALLOWED THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE. 3. THE LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AT THE OUT SET SUBMITTED THAT THE ISSUE IS NOW COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE BY EARLIER ORDERS OF THE TRIBUNAL AS IS NOTED BY THE LEARNED CI(A). THEREFOR E, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS NO MERIT. COPIES OF THE ORDERS ARE FILED ON REC ORD. THE LEARNED DR DID NOT DISPUTE THE ABOVE FACT AND SUBMITTED THAT THE I SSUE IS COVERED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE. 4. ON CONSIDERATION OF THE ABOVE FACTS, WE ARE OF T HE VIEW THAT THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS NO MERIT. IN THE EARLIER YE ARS THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 10 B OF THE IT ACT HAS B EEN ALLOWED. MERELY BECAUSE THE APPEAL OF THE DEPARTMENT IS PENDING BEF ORE THE HONBLE HIGH ITA NO.1230/AHD/2010 ITO- 4(1), AHMEDABAD VS M/S. GATEWAY TECHNOLABS PVT . LTD., AHMEDABAD 3 COURT HAS NO GROUND TO MAKE THE ADDITION AGAIN. THE DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL HAS NO MERIT. THE SAME IS ACCORDINGLY DISMIS SED. 5. AS A RESULT, DEPARTMENTAL APPEAL FAILS. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 9-07-2010 SD/- SD/- (D. C. AGRAWAL) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER (BHAVNESH SAINI) JUDICIAL MEMBER DATE : 9-07-2010 LAKSHMIKANT/- COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT 2. THE RESPONDENT 3. THE CIT CONCERNED 4. THE CIT(A) CONCERNED 5. THE DR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER DY. REGISTRAR, ITAT, AHMEDABAD