ITO, Ward-3(1), Hyderabad V. M/s. Selectsys India Pvt.Ltd., Hyderabad

ITA 1617/HYD/2011

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 59139 (ITAT-HYDERABAD)
• Duration Of Justice: 3 month(s) 29 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 11-01-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: B
• Assessment Year: 2008-2009
• Appeal Filed On: 12-09-2011
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: B V PRASAD REDDY
• Section: 10B

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL HYDERABAD BENCH B', HYDERABAD BEFORE SHRI CHANDRA POOJARI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SMT. ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 1617/HYD/2011 (ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2008-09) INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD-3(1) HYDERABAD VS. M/S. SELECTSYS INDIA PVT. LTD., HYDERABAD PAN: AAKCS0752Q APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY: SHRI B.V. PRASAD REDDY RESPONDENT BY: NONE DATE OF HEARING: 11 . 0 1.201 2 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT: 11.01.2012 O R D E R PER CHANDRA POOJARI, AM: THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A)-IV, HYDERABAD DATED 30.06.2011 FOR TH E ASSESSMENT YEAR 2008-09. 2. THE REVENUE RAISED THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS: 1. THE ORDER OF THE CIT(A) IS ERRONEOUS IN LAW AND ON FACTS. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE UPHELD THE DISALLOWANCE OF 10B, AS THE ASSESSEE FAILED TO PRODUCE RATIFICATION BY THE BOARD APPOINTED IN THIS BEHALF BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IN EXERCISE OF THE POWERS CONFERRED BY SECTION 14 OF INDUSTRIES (DEVELOPMENT AND REGULATION) ACT, 1951. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) SHOULD HAVE APPRECIATED THE INTENT OF CBDT INSTRUCTION NO. 2 OF 2009 DATED 9.3.2009. 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) ERRED IN ALLOWING EXEMPTION U/S. 10B ON RS. 1,10,79,168/- BEING THE AMOUNT I.T.A. NO. 1617/HYD/2011 M/S. SELECTSYS INDIA PVT. LTD. ======================== 2 OF SALE PROCEEDS IN FOREIGN EXCHANGE NOT BROUGHT TO INTO INDIA WITHIN A PERIOD OF SIX MONTHS FROM THE END OF THE PREVIOUS YEAR. 3. BRIEF FACTS OF THE ISSUE ARE THAT THE ASSESSEE CLAI MED DEDUCTION/S. 10B OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. ACCO RDING TO THE ASSESSING OFFICER THE ASSESSEE HAS NOT FURNISHED TH E APPROVAL OF BOARD APPOINTED BY THE CENTRAL GOVERNMENT IN EXERCI SE OF POWER CONFERRED BY SECTION 14 OF THE INDUSTRIES (DE VELOPMENT & REGULATION) ACT, 1951 (55 OF 1951), AND THE RULES M ADE THEREUNDER, IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PROVISIONS OF CL AUSE-IV TO EXPLANATION-2 TO SECTION 10B OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. THE ASSESSEE ALSO FAILED TO SUBMIT THE RATIFICATION BY THE DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER AS ENVISAGED IN THE INSTRU CTION DATED 9.3.2009 (FILE NO. 178/19/2008-ITA01) IN SUPP ORT OF ITS CLAIM U/S. 10B OF THE ACT. 4. ON APPEAL, THE CIT(A) ALLOWED THE CLAIM OF THE ASSE SSEE BY PLACING RELIANCE ON THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN TH E CASE OF K. SUDHA RANI IN ITA NO. 1750/HYD/08 DATED 30.10.2009 WHEREIN IT WAS HELD THAT THE APPROVAL OF 100% EOU BY THE BO ARD AND THE STP IS ONE AND THE SAME. ACCORDINGLY HE ALLOWED TH E EXEMPTION U/S. 10B OF THE ACT. 5. NONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE IN SPITE OF ISSUING NOTICE. WE HAVE HEARD THE LEARNED DR ON TH IS ISSUE AND PERUSED THE MATERIAL ON RECORD. BEFORE THE CIT(A), THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED THE REGISTRATION FROM STP OF INDIA WHICH W AS NOTIFIED BY THE MINISTRY OF COMMERCE, GOVERNMENT OF INDIA VI DE NOTIFICATION NO. 33/(RE)/92-97 DATED 22.3.1994. TH E NOTIFICATION STATES THAT THE SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY PA RK (STP) SCHEME IS A 100% EOU SCHEME. FURTHER THE ASSESSEE PRODUCED COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF K. SUDHA RANI CITED SUPRA. PLACING RELIANCE ON THIS ORDER, THE CIT(A) ALLOWED I.T.A. NO. 1617/HYD/2011 M/S. SELECTSYS INDIA PVT. LTD. ======================== 3 THE CLAIM OF THE ASSESSEE BUT THE ASSESSING OFFICE R HAS NO OCCASION TO CONSIDER THE SAME. HENCE, IN OUR OPINI ON, IT IS JUST AND FAIR TO SEND THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE ASSES SING OFFICER TO CONSIDER THE MATERIAL. ACCORDINGLY, THE ORDER OF T HE CIT(A) IS SET ASIDE AND THE MATTER IS REMITTED BACK TO THE FILE O F THE ASSESSING OFFICER FOR PASSING A DE NOVO ORDER IN THE LIGHT OF THE MATERIAL PRODUCED BY THE ASSESSEE. THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED TO PRODUCE NECESSARY MATERIAL BEFORE THE ASSESSING OFFICER. 6. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS ALLOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 11 TH JANUARY, 2012. SD/ - (ASHA VIJAYARAGHAVAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER SD/ - (CHANDRA POOJARI) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER HYDERABAD, DATED THE 11 TH JANUARY, 2012 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1. THE INCOME - TAX OFFICER, WARD - 3(1), 7 TH FLOOR, 'B' BLOCK, IT TOWERS, AC GUARDS, HYDERABAD. 2. M/S. SELECTSYS INDIA PVT. LTD., PLOT NO. 272/A, MLA COLONY, ROAD NO. 12, BANJARA HILLS, HYDERABAD. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX (APPEALS) - IV, HYDERABAD. 4. THE COMMISSIONER OF WEALTH - TAX - III, HYDERABAD. 5 . THE DR B BENCH, ITAT, HYDERABAD TPRAO