Asst.C.I.T., Bangalore V. M/s EYGBS (India) Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

ITA 1235/BANG/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2017] 130 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 8543 (ITAT-BANGALORE)
• Duration Of Justice: 8 month(s) 5 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 22-02-2017
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: C
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 17-06-2016
• Result in Favour of: Partly Allowed
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Assessee Lawyers: KEERTHI NARAYAN
• Section: 32; 147; 131; 68; 246; 69; 145; 27; 148; 54; 37; 6; 56; 263; 63; 132; 12; 28; 144; 10; 90; 154; 2; 11; 15; 271(1)(b); 139; 92; 22

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL C BENCH : BANGALORE BEFORE SHRI SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI INTURI RAMA RAO, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NOS. 1235 & 1236/BANG/2016 ASSESSMENT YEARS : 2008-09 & 2009-10 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE (O.S.D.), 2(1)(2), BANGALORE. VS. M/S. EYGBS (INDIA) PVT. LTD., RMZ INFINITY TOWER, C 3 RD FLOOR, OLD MADRAS ROAD, K.R. PURAM, BENGALURU 560 016. PAN: AABCE 6565A APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI M.K. BIJU, JCIT (DR) RESPONDENT BY : SHRI KEERTHINARAYAN, CA DATE OF HEARING : 23.01.2017 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 22.02.2017 O R D E R PER SUNIL KUMAR YADAV, JUDICIAL MEMBER THESE APPEALS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE WERE HEARD T OGETHER AND ARE DISPOSED OF BY THIS CONSOLIDATED ORDER. ITA NO. 1235/BANG/2016 2. THIS APPEAL IS PREFERRED BY THE REVENUE AGAINST THE ORDER OF CIT(A) INTER ALIA ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS:- 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS CONTRARY TO THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND HENCE NOT SUSTAINABLE . ITA NOS. 1235 & 1236/BANG/2016 PAGE 2 OF 4 2. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) IS RIGHT ON GIVING RELI EF TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCES OF DEDUCTION S U/S 10A RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF CIT VS. TATA ELXSI LTD, WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY T HE DEPARTMENT AND AN SLP FILED BEFORE THE APEX COURT O N THE SAID ISSUE IS PENDING FOR ADJUCATION. 3. WHETHER THE CIT(A) IS RIGHT ON THE ISSUE OF AD JUSTMENT OF BUSINESS LOSSES FROM SEZ UNIT UNABSORBED DEPRECI ATION LOSS AGAINST THE PROFITS OF THE OTHER UNIT, SINCE THE OR DER ON WHICH THE CIT(A) HAS RELIED I.E. THE JUDGEMENT OF HONBLE HIG H COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD., (341 ITR 385), WHICH ITSELF IS PENDING BEFORE THE SUPREME COURT FOR ADJUCATION. 4. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS MAY BE REVERSED AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY BE RESTORED. 3. GROUND NO. 1 IS GENERAL IN NATURE. 4. APROPOS GROUND NO. 2, IT IS POINTED OUT THAT THE IMPUGNED ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT OF HONBLE JURI SDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. TATA ELXSI LTD. (349 ITR 98)(KARN) . SINCE THE CIT(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THE ISSUE FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT AND IN VIEW OF TH E HONBLE SUPREME COURT DISMISSING THE SLP FILED BY THE DEPARTMENT AG AINST THE JUDGMENT OF THE HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT, WE FIND N O INFIRMITY THEREIN. 4. APROPOS GROUND NO. 3, IT IS ALSO NOTICED THAT CIT(A) HAS DISPOSED OF THIS ISSUE FOLLOWING THE JUDGMENT OF HO NBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. YOKOGAWA INDIA LTD. (341 ITR 385) . ITA NOS. 1235 & 1236/BANG/2016 PAGE 3 OF 4 NOW THIS JUDGMENT HAS BEEN APPROVED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. THEREFORE, WE FIND NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF CIT (A). ACCORDINGLY, WE CONFIRM THE SAME. ITA NO. 1236/BANG/2016 5. THE REVENUE HAS PREFERRED THIS APPEAL AGAINST OR DER OF CIT(A) INTER ALIA ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS. 1. THE ORDER OF THE LD. CIT(A) IS CONTRARY TO THE FACT S AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND HENCE NOT SUSTAINABLE . 2. WHETHER THE LD. CIT(A) IS RIGHT ON GIVING RELI EF TO THE ASSESSEE ON THE ISSUE OF DISALLOWANCES OF DEDUCTION S U/S 10A RELYING ON THE DECISION OF THE HONBLE HIGH COURT I N THE CASE OF CIT VS. TATA ELXSI LTD, WHICH WAS NOT ACCEPTED BY T HE DEPARTMENT AND AN SLP FILED BEFORE THE APEX COURT O N THE SAID ISSUE IS PENDING FOR ADJUCATION. 3. FOR THESE AND OTHER GROUNDS THAT MAY BE URGED AT THE TIME OF HEARING, IT IS PRAYED THAT THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IN SO FAR AS IT RELATES TO THE ABOVE GROUNDS MAY BE REVERSED AND THAT OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER MAY BE RESTORED. 6. THE CIT(A) HAS DECIDED THE IMPUGNED ISSUE BY FO LLOWING JUDGMENT OF HONBLE JURISDICTIONAL HIGH COURT IN TH E CASE OF CIT VS. TATA ELXSI LTD. (349 ITR 98) WHICH WAS CONFIRMED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT. THEREFORE, NO INTERFERENCE IS CALLE D FOR IN THE ORDER OF CIT(A). ITA NOS. 1235 & 1236/BANG/2016 PAGE 4 OF 4 7. IN THE RESULT, BOTH THE APPEALS BY THE REVENUE A RE DISMISSED. PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON THIS 22 ND DAY OF FEBRUARY, 2017. SD/- SD/- ( INTURI RAMA RAO ) (SUNIL KUMAR YAD AV ) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDIC IAL MEMBER BANGALORE, DATED, THE 22 ND FEBRUARY, 2017. /MS/ COPY TO: 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, ITAT, BANGALORE. 6. GUARD FILE BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR, ITAT, BANGALORE.