PARAGON BIOMEDICAL INDIAN PVT. LTD. V. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION)

WP(C)/12717/2014

AI Insights

Paragon Biomedical Indian Pvt. Ltd., a 100% Export Oriented Unit (EOU) registered with the Software Technology Parks of India, sought judicial intervention after their claim for tax exemption under Section 10B of the Income-tax Act for the assessment year 2011-12 was disallowed. The disallowance was based on the grounds that the registration as a 100% EOU was not granted by the appropriate board under the Industries (Development and Regulation) Act, 1961. The petitioner filed an appeal and a stay petition with the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), which were still pending. The High Court's intervention was sought to expedite the decision on these pending matters.

• Counselvise Citation: [2014] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 758849 (HC-KERALA)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 20-05-2014
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: W.P.(C)NO.16836/2013
• Laws Referred To: Income-tax Act, Industries(Development and Regulation) Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Others
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: JOSE JOSEPH
• Assessee Lawyers: JOSEPH MARKOSE; V MARKOS; BINU MATHEW; TOM THOMAS; ABRAHAM MARKOS; ABRAHAM THARAKAN
• Keywords: 100% Export Oriented Unit; Appeal; Income tax exemption; Stay Petition; Software Technology Parks of India
• Section: 10B

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT: THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ANIL K.NARENDRAN TUESDAY , THE 20TH DAY OF MAY 2014/30TH VAISAKHA, 1936 WP(C).No. 12717 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------- PETITIONER: ------------------ PARAGON BIOMEDICAL INDIAN PVT. LTD., B-16, GAY ATRI TECHNOPARK, TRIVANDRUM - 695 581 REPRESENTED BY ITS DIRECTOR, MR.VINOD NARAYANAN. BY ADVS.SRI.JOSEPH MARKOSE (SR.) SRI.V.ABRAHAM MARKOS SRI.BINU MATHEW SRI.TOM THOMAS (KAKKUZHIYIL) SRI.ABRAHAM JOSEPH MARKOS SRI.ABRAHAM VARGHESE THARAKAN RESPONDENTS:-: -------------------------- 1. ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF INCOME TAX (EXEMPTION), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 2. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-I(I), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 3. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS), THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. 4. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM - 695 003. BY SRI.JOSE JOSEPH, SC, FOR INCOME- TAX THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING COME UP FOR ADMISSION ON 20-05-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: WP(C).No. 12717 of 2014 (L) ---------------------------- APPENDIX PETITIONER(S)' EXHIBITS ------------------------------------- EXHIBIT P1. TRUE COPY OF THE LICENSE DATED 21.10.2005 ISSUED BY THE SOFTWARE TECHNOLOGY PARKS OF INDIA (STPI). EXHIBIT P2. TRUE COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER DATED 29.03.2014 PASSED BY THE 1ST RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P3. TRUE COPY OF APPEAL DATED 23.04.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P4. TRUE COPY OF STAY PETITION DATED 23.04.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIOENR BEFORE THE 3RD RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P5. TRUE COPY OF PETITION FOR STAY DATED 23.04.2014 FILED BY THE PETITIONER BEFORE THE 4TH RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P6. TRUE COPY OF DEMAND NOTICE DATED 08.05.2014 ISSUED BY THE 2ND RESPONDENT. EXHIBIT P7. TRUE COPY OF JUDGMENT DATED 04.07.2013 PASSED BY THIS COURT IN W.P.(C)NO.16836/2013. RESPONDENT(S)' EXHIBITS: NIL TRUE COPY P.S.TO JUDGE dsn ANIL K.NARENDRAN, J -------------------------------------------------- W.P.(C.).No.12717 of 2014 -------------------------------------------------- DATED THIS THE 20th DAY OF MAY, 2014 JUDGMENT The petitioner is a 100% Export Oriented Unit(EOU) registered with the Software Technology Parks of India, an autonomous society constituted by the Union of India for grant of registration of units engaged in Software and IT Enabled Services. Section 10B of the Income-tax Act gives exemption for a period of 10 years for all 100% EOUs. For the assessment year 2011-12, the petitioner claimed exemption under Section 10B of the Act, which has been disallowed vide Exhibit P2 order, on the ground that registration granted to the petitioner as a 100% EOU is by the Software Technology Park India and not by the Board constituted under the Industries(Development and Regulation) Act, 1961. Against Exhibit P2 order, the petitioner has preferred Exhibit P3 appeal before the 3rd respondent along with Exhibit P4 stay petition. According to the petitioner, the said appeal and stay petition W.P.(C).No.12717/14 -2- are still pending consideration before the 3rd respondent. The petitioner has approached this court seeking various reliefs including a direction to the 3rd respondent to expeditiously dispose of Exhibit P3 appeal and Exhibit P4 stay petition. 2. Heard the learned counsel for the petitioner and the learned Standing Counsel for the Income-tax Department. 3. Challenging Exhibit P2 order, the petitioner has filed Exhibit P3 statutory appeal, accompanied by Exhibit P4 stay petition, and the said appeal and stay petition are now pending consideration before the 3rd respondent, which is the appellate authority. 4. In the facts and circumstances of the case, this Writ Petition is disposed of directing the 3rd respondent to consider and pass appropriate orders on Exhibit P4 stay petition filed by the petitioner within a period of one month from the date of receipt of a certified copy of this judgment. W.P.(C).No.12717/14 -3- Till such a decision is taken, coercive steps taken against the petitioner pursuant to Exhibit P6 notice shall be kept in abeyance. The petitioner shall produce a copy of the Writ Petition and a certified copy of this judgment before the 3rd respondent for compliance. Sd/- ANIL K.NARENDRAN, JUDGE dsn "