DCIT, CIRCLE-12(2), NEW DELHI vs. INTERGLOBE TECHNOLOGY QUOTIENT PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 6522/DEL/2017Status: DisposedITAT Delhi07 December 2020AY 2012-135 pages

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

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal dismissed the Revenue's appeal, upholding the CIT(A)'s decision. The Tribunal found no change in facts from earlier years where the High Court had ruled in favor of the assessee.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 10AA for software export services. The Assessing Officer disallowed this claim, citing previous years' disallowances and arguing the assessee was merely earning commission, not eligible for the deduction. The CIT(A) allowed the claim, following a coordinate bench's decision upheld by the High Court.

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee is eligible for deduction under Section 10AA for software export services, particularly when the nature of services and previous disallowances are considered.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10AA,Section 115JB,Section 143(3)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, DELHI BENCH “C”: NEW DELHI

Before: SHRI AMIT SHUKLA & SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI

For Appellant: Shri Rohit Jain, Adv, Shri Aditya Vohra Adv, Shri Arpit Garg Adv
For Respondent: Shri Gaurav Dudeja senior departmental representative
Hearing: 07/12/2020Pronounced: 07/12/2020

O R D E R PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M.

1.

This appeal is filed by the learned DEPUTY COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, Circle – 12 (2), New Delhi (the learned assessing officer/AO) against the order of the COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) – 4, New Delhi dated 31st of August 2017 for assessment year 2012 – 13 raising following grounds of appeal:- i. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned CIT – A has erred in allowing the claim of ₹ 482,271,669/– towards deduction u/s 10 AA of the income tax act of though assessee was not entitled to such claim. ii. The learned CIT – A has erred in not examining the fact whether or not the assessee said to be engaged in the business of software export to be eligible for deduction u/s 10 AA of the income tax act, 1961.

2. The assessee company is engaged in the business of software development and providing information technology enabled services in the special economic zone unit approved Under SEZs scheme for data processing services.

3. The assessee filed its return of income on 26/9/2012 showing the total income of ₹ 483,657,670. The assessee also declared book profit u/s 115JB of ₹ 893,358,475/–. The assessee’s claim of exemption u/s 10 AA of ₹ 482,271,669 was examined by the learned assessing officer wherein assessee claims that it is engaged in the field of export of data processing services and thus it is in the 6th year of claim u/s 10 AA.

4. The claim of the assessee was already disallowed in assessment year 2007 – 08, 2008 – 09, 2009 – 10, 2000 – 11 and 2011 –

12. The reason for disallowance is the original assessment order passed in these years. The learned assessing officer noted that the facts stated in that year is also applicable for this year too. The learned assessing officer noted that assessee is just earning a commission from a foreign company and such commission has been given the colour of exports being provided from an assessee SEZ unit so as to claim 100% deduction of the profits u/s 10 AA of the. Therefore according to him as the assessee company did not fulfill the criteria for claim of exemption u/s 10 AA, the same was denied to the assessee company as in the last assessment orders. The assessee was asked to show cause why the same should not be followed.

5.

The assessee submitted that assessee is engaged in the similar kind of software development and providing information technology enabled services namely data processing and its exports from its SEZs unit located at Noida. Assessee Company continues to provide service to Galileo Netherland BV. The assessee company has also submitted that it fulfils all the conditions laid down u/s 10 AA of the act and it is also been granted approval by The Development Commissioner, Noida Special Economic Zone and the entire consideration towards the export of services been realized in foreign currency and the claim of deduction u/s 10 AA has also certified by the report in form number 56F.

6.

The learned assessing officer after considering the submission of the assessee, in view of the assessment order passed in the earlier years, disallowed the deduction u/s 10 AA of the act of ₹ 482,271,669/– and passed an assessment order assessing the total income of the assessee at ₹ 965,929,338/– against the returned income at ₹ 483,657,669 u/s 143 (3) of the act on 25th of March 2015.

7.

The assessee is aggrieved with that order and preferred appeal before the learned CIT – A. The learned CIT – A followed the decision of the coordinate bench wherein the identical addition made in the hence of the assessee for assessment year 2007 – 08 to 2000 – 11 was deleted. The learned CIT – A further noted in paragraph number 7.3 of his order that the order of the coordinate bench has also been upheld by the honourable High Court in case of the assessee in ITA number 330/2017 for assessment year 2000 – 11 dated 22 May 2017. Therefore, based on these orders, the learned and CIT – A directed the learned assessing officer to delete the disallowance u/s

More judgments on Section 10AA

All 857 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10AA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →