PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 vs. SAMYAK INFOTECH PVT LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the Appellate Tribunal had not committed any error in deleting the disallowance of exemption under Section 10B. The Court found that the issue was squarely covered against the Revenue by the decision of a Division Bench of the same Court in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad Vs. Zealous Web Technologies. In that case, it was held that if an assessee possesses a certificate issued by the competent authority, the non-production of an approval letter from the Board cannot be a valid reason to deny the benefit under Section 10B. Applying this precedent to the facts, the Court concluded that no substantial question of law arises. The appeal was accordingly dismissed.
What were the facts?
The Revenue has appealed against an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT) dated February 13, 2018, for Assessment Year 2008-09. The ITAT had confirmed the deletion of a disallowance of exemption under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act, amounting to Rs. 52,93,042. The Assessing Officer had denied the exemption, stating the assessee company failed to provide an approval letter from the 'Board' appointed under the Industries (Development and Regulations) Act, 1951. The CIT(Appeals) had allowed the claim, finding that an export-oriented undertaking certificate from the appropriate authority was on record. The ITAT upheld this decision.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of exemption under Section 10B of the Act of Rs. 52,93,042? The Revenue contends that the assessee failed to produce the approval letter from the 'Board' appointed under the Industries (Development and Regulations) Act, 1951, which is a prerequisite for claiming exemption under Section 10B. The Revenue argues that this omission should lead to the denial of the exemption. The assessee, supported by the CIT(Appeals) and the ITAT, argues that an export-oriented undertaking certificate issued by the appropriate authority, which was on record, is sufficient. They rely on the Gujarat High Court's decision in Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad Vs. Zealous Web Technologies, which held that non-production of the Board's approval letter is not a ground to deny Section 10B benefits if a certificate from the competent authority is available.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
C/TAXAP/891/2018 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 891 of 2018 ======================================================================= PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX 4 Versus SAMYAK INFOTECH PVT LTD ======================================================================= Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the PETITIONER(s) No. 1 for the RESPONDENT(s) No. 1 ======================================================================= CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE A.Y. KOGJE
Date : 23/07/2018 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned order passed by the learned ITAT dated 13.02.2018 passed in IAT No.1432/Ahd/2015 for Assessment Year 2008-09, the Revenue has preferred the present Tax Appeal with the following proposed questions of law:- “Whether the Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance of exemption u/s. 10B of the Act of Rs.52,93,042/-” 2. Heard Mrs.Mauna M.Bhatt, learned Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue. 3. At the outset, it is required to be noted that the Assessing Officer denied exemption claimed under Section 10B of the Act made by the assessee company on the ground that the assessee has not submitted the approval letter for its 100% Export Oriented Undertaking from the “Board” appointed in this behalf by the Central Page 1 of 2
C/TAXAP/891/2018 ORDER Government in exercise of powers conferred by Section 14 of the Industries (Development and Regulations) Act, 1951 and the Rules made under that Act. However, thereafter, the learned CIT (Appeals) allowed the said claim on the ground that in fact, the export oriented undergoing certificate was given by the appropriate authority which was on record. The same has been confirmed by the learned ITAT by impugned order by relying upon decision of Division Bench of this Court in the case of Principal Commissioner of Income Tax-3, Ahmedabad Vs. Zealous Web Technologies, reported in (2016) 68 Taxmann.com 379 (Gujarat), by which it is specifically observed and held that once the assessee is having the certificate issued by the competent authority, in that case, non-production of the approval letter by the Board cannot be a ground to deny the benefit under Section 10B of the Act. Applying the said decision to the facts of the case on hand, it cannot be said that the learned Tribunal has committed any error. On the contrary, the question is squarely covered against the Revenue. No substantial question of law arises. The present appeal deserves to be dismissed. It is accordingly dismissed. (M.R. SHAH, J) (A.Y. KOGJE, J) SHITOLE Page 2 of 2
More judgments on Section 10B
- Brainbees Solutions Limited, Pune… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITTPA 1431/PUN/2026[2022-2023]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- ACIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs Galaxy Surfactants Limited, MumbaiITA 6984/MUM/2025[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2011-2012
- Ivl Dhunseri Petrochem Industries Pvt… vs D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), KolkataITTPA 4/KOL/2026[2022-2023]Status: Heard11 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- T vs Motor Co. Ltd., Chennaivs.DCIT, Corp…ITTPA 52/CHNY/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Vrajlal Chanabhai Kachhadiya, Jamnagar vs ITO, Ward-2(6), JamnagarITA 847/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2010-11
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Ganesh Trimbak Saraf And Another vs. The State Of Maharashtra And AnotherBombay · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vajram Infra Material Industries vs. The State Of Andhra PradeshAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- Tyre Center vs. The Superintendent Of CGSTAndhra Pradesh · 26 Oct 2026
- M/S Monolith Resorts Private Limited vs. The CommissionerUttarakhand · 26 Oct 2026
- Sutlej Textiles And Industries Limited vs. Union Of INDIARajasthan · 26 Oct 2026