URVINDERPAL SINGH ATTARSINGH MADAN,NAVI MUMBAI vs. INCOME TAX OFFICER, INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA 3478/MUM/2024Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai08 January 2025AY 2011-12Bench: SHRI SANDEEP GOSAIN (Judicial Member)3 pages
AI SummaryRemanded

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal noted that in the assessee's own case for an earlier year, a similar issue was remitted to the file of the Assessing Officer (AO) for verification because the details furnished before the ITAT were not available before the AO and were filed for the first time before the ITAT. Since the issue in the present appeal is the same, the Tribunal decided to remit the issue back to the file of the Ld. AO. The AO is directed to verify the details submitted by the assessee and pass an order afresh, providing the appellant with an opportunity of being heard. The appeal of the appellant is allowed for statistical purposes.

What were the facts?

The assessee, V.K. Jewellery, is in appeal against the order of the CIT(A) for Assessment Year 2013-14. The Assessing Officer (AO) restricted the deduction claimed under Section 10AA of the Income Tax Act to the extent of foreign exchange sale proceeds received in India by the due date of filing the return of income. The CIT(A) dismissed the assessee's appeal, noting that the assessee had not submitted details of the dates of receipt of foreign exchange into India. During the ITAT hearing, the assessee submitted that a part of the remaining foreign exchange was received by July 9, 2013, and another part was settled against imports. The assessee also referred to a previous ITAT order in its own case (ITA No. 3163/Mum/2024) where a similar issue was remitted to the AO for verification.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the appellant is entitled to deduction under Section 10AA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on foreign exchange sale proceeds not received by the time the Return of Income was filed for AY 2013-14? (Question of law) Assessee's contention: The assessee argued that for the purpose of calculating deduction under Section 10AA, the time limit for realization of export proceeds is not a specified date. The assessee relied on a previous ITAT order in its own case (ITA No. 3163/Mum/2024) which remitted a similar issue for verification by the AO, as details were not available before the AO and were filed for the first time before the ITAT. Revenue's contention: The revenue, through the AO, restricted the exemption to the extent of forex received by the due date of filing the return of income. The CIT(A) dismissed the appeal for non-submission of details regarding the dates of receipt of forex.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10AA

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Mumbai “F” Bench, Mumbai.

Before: Smt. Kavitha Rajagopal (JM) & Shri Omkareshwar Chidara (AM)

For Appellant: Shri Sunil Hirawat
For Respondent: Ms. Kavitha Kaushik
1.

In this case, the only issue to be adjudicated is whether appellant is entitled to the deduction under section 10AA of the Income Tax Act on the foreign exchange sale proceeds which was not received by the time the Return of Income was filed for A.Y. 2013-14.

2.

The Ld. AO restricted the exemption claimed under section 10AA of the Act to the extent the forex is received in India within the time, the Return of Income was filed.

3. Aggrieved by the Order of Ld. AO, the appellant filed an appeal with Ld. CIT(A) and this first appellate authority dismissed the appeal of appellant stating the appellant has not submitted the details of dates of receipt of forex into India.

4.

Further aggrieved by the Order of Ld. CIT(A), the appellant filed an appeal with the following grounds of appeal :

2 1. On facts and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax-Appeals had erred in not allowing deduction u/s. 10AA in respect of the exports of Rs. 3,06,35,586/-. Under the facts and circumstances of the matter, the deduction u/s. 10AA ought to have been allowed.

2. On facts and in law, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax-Appeals had erred in not appreciating that for the purpose of calculating deduction u/s. 10AA, the time limit for realisation of export proceeds is not a specified date. Under the facts and circumstances of the matter, the deduction u/s. 10AA ought to have been allowed accordingly.

3.

The Appellant craves leave to add, alter, vary, omit, substitute or amend the above grounds of appeal, at any time before or at, the time of hearing of the appeal, so as to enable the Hon'ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal to decide this appeal according to law.

5.

During the course of hearing before ITAT, the Ld. AR of the appellant has mentioned that a part of the remaining forex was received subsequently i.e., by 9.7.2013 and part of the forex was settled against imports from parties submitted the relevant details. It was also submitted that in the earlier year, in appellant’s own case, in similar circumstances vide order dated 26.8.2024 the ITAT has remitted the issue for verification by Ld. AO because the details furnished before the ITAT now were not available before the AO and they were filed for the first time before ITAT. Since the issue being same, the issue is remitted to the file of the Ld. AO with a direction to verify the details and pass an Order afresh giving an opportunity to the appellant.

6.

The appeal of appellant is allowed for statistical purposes.

Order pronounced in the open Court on 30/09/2025.

More judgments on Section 10AA

All 857 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →