ACIT, CHENNAI V. M/s. SRA Systems Ltd., CHENNAI

ITA 2150/CHNY/2010

• Counselvise Citation: [2012] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 64528 (ITAT-CHENNAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 10 month(s) 15 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-11-2012
• Appeal Filed By: Department
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 07-11-2012
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 22-12-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: SHAJI P JACOB IRS
• Assessee Lawyers: T BANUSEKAR
• Keywords: Depreciation; Unabsorbed depreciation

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL A BENCH, CHENNAI BEFORE DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT AND SHRI CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD, JUDICIAL MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 2150/MDS/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2006-07 THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, COMPANY CIRCLE-VI(1), CHENNAI 34. VS. M/S. SRA SYSTEMS LTD. NO.100, VALLUVARKOTTAM HIGH ROAD, NUNGAMBAKKAM, CHENNAI - 34. PAN AAECS7014H (APPELLANT) (RESPONDENT) APPELLANT BY : SHRI SHAJI P. JACOB, IRS, ADDL. CIT RESPONDENT BY : SHRI T. BANUSEKAR, FCA DATE OF HEARING : 7 TH NOVEMBER, 2012 DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 7 TH NOVEMBER, 2012 O R D E R PER DR. O.K. NARAYANAN, VICE-PRESIDENT THIS APPEAL IS FILED BY THE REVENUE. THE RELEVANT ASSESSMENT YEAR IS 2006-07. THE APPEAL IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS)-V, AT CHENNAI ITA 2150/10 :- 2 -: DATED 27.9.2010. THE APPEAL ARISES OUT OF THE ASSE SSMENT COMPLETED UNDER SEC.144C, READ WITH SECTIONS 92C(4) AND 144C(3) OF THE INCOME-TAX ACT, 1961. 2. THE FIRST GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IN THE PR ESENT APPEAL IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEA LS) HAS ERRED IN ALLOWING THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF T HE ASSESSING OFFICER NOT DEDUCTING THE AMOUNT OF INTERNET EXPENS ES FROM THE TOTAL TURNOVER WHILE CALCULATING THE DEDUCTION UNDE R SEC.10A. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS RELIED ON T HE SPECIAL BENCH DECISION OF THE MADRAS TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE O F SAK SOFT LTD. REPORTED IN 121 TTJ 865 AND AS SUCH, THERE IS NO INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER PASSED BY THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX( APPEALS). THIS VIEW HAS BEEN FORTIFIED BY THE HONBLE KARNATA KA HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT V. TATA ELXSI LTD. & ORS. (204 T AXMAN 321). THIS GROUND THEREFORE, FAILS. 3. THE SECOND GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN AL LOWING THE APPEAL AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER D ISALLOWING THE CLAIM OF DEDUCTION UNDER SEC.10A. IN FACT THE COMM ISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS RELIED ON THE DECISION OF T HE TRIBUNAL IN ITA 2150/10 :- 3 -: ASSESSEES OWN CASE FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2002-03 PASSED IN ITA NO. 2255/MDS/2006. THE VERY SAME VIEW HAS BEEN TAKEN BY THE TRIBUNAL AGAIN FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE IN ITA NO.175/MDS/2010. IN THESE CIRCUMST ANCES, WE FIND THAT THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-T AX(APPEALS) IS JUSTIFIED. 4. THE THIRD GROUND RAISED BY THE REVENUE IS THAT T HE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS ERRED IN HO LDING THAT THE CLAIM UNDER SEC.10A SHALL BE ALLOWED BEFORE ADJ USTING BROUGHT FORWARD LOSSES AND UNABSORBED DEPRECIATION. THE CO MMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPEALS) HAS RELIED ON THE ORDERS OF THE ITAT, CHENNAI BENCHES RENDERED IN DIFFERENT CASES LIKE M/ S. FORD BUSINESS SERVICES CENTRE P. LTD. (114 TTJ 881), M/S . CHANGEPOND TECHNOLOGIES (P) LTD. (119 TTJ 18) ETC., TO DECIDE THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE . WE FIND THAT THERE IS NO ERROR IN THE ORDER OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX(APPE ALS) ON THIS POINT. 5. IN RESULT, THIS APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENUE IS D ISMISSED. ITA 2150/10 :- 4 -: ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT AT THE TIME OF H EARING ON WEDNESDAY, THE 7 TH OF NOVEMBER, 2012 AT CHENNAI. SD/- SD/- (CHALLA NAGENDRA PRASAD) (DR.O.K.NARAYANAN) JUDICIAL MEMBER VICE-PRESIDEN T CHENNAI, DATED THE 7 TH NOVEMBER , 2012 MPO* COPY TO : 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3. CIT 4. CIT(A) 5. DR 6. GF.