M/S EKA SOFTWARE SOLUTIONS PRIVATE LIMITED,BANGALORE vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME-TAX, CIRCLE-2(1)(2), BANGALORE

PDF · subscribers
ITA 613/BANG/2020Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore16 October 2020AY 2010-113 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had already directed the AO to re-compute the Section 10A deduction. Given that this adjustment would render the assessee's grounds academic, the Tribunal chose not to adjudicate the appeal directly.

What were the facts?

The assessee appealed against the CIT(A)'s order, contending that legal grounds regarding the validity of the assessment order and a disallowance under Section 40(a)(i) were not adjudicated. The CIT(A) had directed the AO to re-compute the deduction under Section 10A, which the assessee believed would result in no additional tax liability.

What were the issues?

Whether the Tribunal needs to adjudicate grounds that become academic due to a prior direction by the CIT(A) to re-compute a deduction.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 40(a)(i),Section 10A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C’’BENCH: BANGALORE

Before: SHRI B. R. BASKARAN & SMT. BEENA PILLAI

For Appellant: Shri Ajay Rotti, A.R
For Respondent: Smt. R. Premi, D.R
Hearing: 15.10.2020Pronounced: 16.10.2020

PER B.R. BASKARAN, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER:

1.

The assessee has filed this appeal challenging the order dated 28.2.2020 passed by Ld. CIT(A)-2, Bengaluru and it relates to the assessment year 2010-11. In this appeal, the assessee is contending that the Ld. CIT(A) has not adjudicated legal grounds relating to the validity of the assessment order passed beyond the limitation period and also in not adjudicating the ground relating to disallowance made u/s 40(a)(i) of the Income-tax Act,1961 ['the Act' for short].

M/s. Eka Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

Page 2 of 3 2. The Ld. Counsel appearing for the assessee submitted that the ground urged on merits relate to disallowance made by the A.O. u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act. He submitted that the Ld. CIT(A) did not adjudicate the contention of the assessee that no disallowance u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act is called for. The assessee had raised an alternative contention before Ld. CIT(A) that the disallowance made u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act would go to increase the amount of “profits of business” and hence, the deduction allowable u/s 10A of the Act would also increase corresponding to the amount of disallowanec. The alternative contention of the assessee was accepted by the Ld. CIT(A) by following the decision rendered by the Tribunal in the assessee’s own case in and accordingly, the Ld. CIT(A) has directed the A.O. to re-compute deduction u/s 10A of the Act. Accordingly, the Ld. A.R. submitted that, if the A.O. gives effect to the order passed by Ld. CIT(A), there will be no additional tax liability in the hands of the assessee. Since the A.O. has not yet given effect to the order of Ld. CIT(A), the assessee filed this appeal before Tribunal.

3.

The Ld. A.R. submitted that the grounds urged in this appeal would become academic in nature if the A.O. give effect to the order of Ld. CIT(A) with regard to the re-computation of deduction u/s 10A of the Act. Accordingly, without prejudice to the right of the assessee to seek recall of the order for adjudication of the grounds urged in the present appeal, the Ld A.R submitted that the Tribunal may dispose of the appeal by directing the AO to give effect to the directions given by Ld CIT(A) with regard to the re-computation of deduction u/s 10A of the Act

4.

We heard Ld. D.R. and perused the record. We notice that the Ld. CIT(A) has already given direction to the A.O. to recompute the deduction u/s 10A of the Act consequent to disallowance made

M/s. Eka Software Solutions Pvt. Ltd., Bangalore

Page 3 of 3 by him u/s 40(a)(i) of the Act. According to the assessee, there will not be any additional tax liability, if the above said direction is given effect to by the A.O. Under these set of facts, the grounds urged by the assessee before Tribunal would become academic in nature. We have also considered the prayer of the Ld. A.R. Accordingly, we direct the A.O. to give effect to the order of the Ld. CIT(A) as expeditiously as possible. Accordingly, we do not find it necessary to adjudicate the grounds urged by the assessee before us. The assessee may seek recall of the order, if found so necessary.

5.

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is treated as dismissed.

More judgments on Section 40(a)(i)

All 2,009 judgments and leading authorities on Section 40(a)(i) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →