“free trade zone”

DeductionsSection 10ASection 10A53 judgments

The decision most relied on for free trade zone is CIT v. Menon Impex (P.) Ltd. (259 ITR 403), cited in 42 judgments on BharatTax.

Leading authorities on free trade zone

CIT v. Menon Impex (P.) Ltd.

259 ITR 403 · 2003 · High Court

citing judgments

Interest income, such as from bank deposits or letters of credit, qualifies for deduction under sections 10A and 10AA only if it has a direct and immediate nexus with the eligible industrial undertaking's business.

Judgments citing free trade zone

M/S. Mindtree Limited, Bengaluru vs. The Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Central Circle-1(3), Bengaluru

In the result, the appeal by the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 213/BANG/2022[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore05 Aug 2022AY 2013-14

Bench: Shri George George K. & Ms. Padmavathy Sassessment Year : 2013-14

For Appellant: Shri Tata Krishna, AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Muzaffar Hussain, CIT(DR)(ITAT)

Section 10ASection 115J

export turnover" though as per provisions of s. 10A, which in respect of special provision in respect of newly established undertaking in Free Trade Zone, Explanation 2(iv) the "export turnover" specifies the condition of bringing into India convertible foreign exchange. Similarly we find that "export turnover

Loreal India Pvt. Ltd, Mumbai vs. Addl/Jt/Dy/ACIT/ITO/NFAC, Delhi

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2016-17 is treated as partly allowed

ITA 802/MUM/2022[2017-18]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2022AY 2017-18

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

clause 1.5 of the agreement, which means the territory of Nepal, Bhutan, Bangladesh, Maldives, Mauritius, India and Sri Lanka. However, it excludes any free trade zone, which may exist or may be created. Further it excludes duty free shops located in the duty free or travel retail area which

L' Oreal India P. Ltd., Mumbai vs. National E-Assessment Centre/ Dy CIT-Circle-7(1)(1), Mumbai

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee for AY 2016-17 is treated as partly allowed

ITA 1198/MUM/2021[2016-17]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai29 Jun 2022AY 2016-17

Section 143(3)Section 144CSection 92C

Shri Prabhukumar Aiyappa Kullatira, Bangalore vs. Income Tax Officer Ward-4(3)(4), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is dismissed

ITA 3048/BANG/2018[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore15 Jun 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year: 2015-16

For Appellant: Smt. Pratibha, A.RFor Respondent: Smt. Riyadarshini Basaganni, D.R

Section 143(3)Section 234ASection 5(1)

during such year. Additionally. it is noted from the written submissions of the assessee, 20. that Capital Gains are not taxable in UAE / Free Trade Zone. Further, Hon 'ble Advance Ruling Authorities has held in certain cases that when the income arising to any person is exempted ... Khalil were actually residents of UAE. Further, it was not established according to the AO that though the company was located in Dubai Free Trade Zone, the company was wholly controlled from UAE. Accordingly, he was of the opinion that the company was not proved to be wholly managed

Strides Pharma Science Ltd, Navi Mumbai vs. Dy CIT 15 (3)(2), Mumbai

In the result, appeal by the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purpose

ITA 7992/MUM/2019[2015-16]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai06 Apr 2022AY 2015-16

Bench: Shri Prashant Maharishi & Shri Sandeep Singh Karhail

For Appellant: Shri Nishit Gandhi a/w Ms. Akshita BhandariFor Respondent: Ms. Vatsalaa Jha (CIT)

Section 143(3)Section 144C(1)Section 144C(13)Section 144C(5)Section 92C

that the assessee has advanced money as share application money to Golden Harvest a foreign AE to set up a plant in free trade zone in Sharjah. It is also undisputed that the AE could not convert the share application money into share capital by issuing shares to the assessee ... permission from the free trade zone authorities with whom the AE was registered was pending and this was the only sole reason for not issuing the shares in favour of the assessee. Now the issue before us is whether the share application money could be treated as loan and could

M/S. Vantage Agora Marketing Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax, Circle- 12(5), Bangalore

In the result, the appeal filed by assessee stands allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 373/BANG/2020[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore07 Mar 2022AY 2009-10

Bench: Shri. B.R. Baskaran & Smt. Beena Pillaiassessment Year : 2009-10 M/S. Vantage Agora Marketing Pvt. Ltd., # Pixel Park-A, 4Th Floor, The Deputy Pes Institute Of Commissioner Of Technology, Income Tax, Vs. Hosur Road, Electronic Circle – 12(5), City, Bangalore. Bangalore – 560 100. Pan: Aaccv1443P Appellant Respondent : Shri V. Chandrashekar, Assessee By Advocate : Smt. Priyadarshini Revenue By Basaganni, Jcit (Dr) Date Of Hearing : 30-12-2021 Date Of Pronouncement : 07-03-2022 Order Per Beena Pillaipresent Appeal Has Been Filed By Assessee Against Order Dated 30/03/2016 Passed By The Ld.Cit(A), Mysore For Assessment Year 2009-10 On Following Grounds Of Appeal: “1. The Order Of The Hon'Ble Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), Mysuru, Insofar As It Is Against The Appellant, Is Opposed To Law, Weight Of Evidence, Natural Justice, Probabilities, Facts & Circumstances Of The Appellant'S Case.

For Respondent: Shri V. Chandrashekar

Section 10ASection 234CSection 72

which is in pari materia with Sec.10-B of the Act) read as follows: "10B. Special provisions in respect of newly established undertaking in free trade zone etc.,-(1) Subject to the provisions of this section, a deduction of such profits and gains as are derived by undertaking from the export

American Power Conversion (India) Private Limited, Bangalore vs. Addl.C.I.T., Bangalore

In the result, appeal of the assessee stands partly allowed as indicated herein above

ITA 1111/BANG/2012[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore28 Feb 2022AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri. Chandra Poojari & Smt. Beena Pillaiit(Tp)A No. 1111/Bang/2012 Assessment Year : 2008-09

For Appellant: Shri Ketan Ved, CA

Section 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 92C

being a beneficial provision was introduced for purpose of increasing exports from India and to encourage establishment of export-oriented industrial undertaking in free trade zone 12.2 Ld.AR in support of his argument placed reliance upon decision of Mumbai Tribunal in case of Tech Mahindra R&D Services

Canon India Pvt. Ltd., Gurgaon vs. ACIT, National Faceless Assesment Center, New Delhi

In the result the appeal of the assessee in ITA

ITA 468/DEL/2021[2004-05]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi20 Oct 2021AY 2004-05

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Amit Shukla[Assessment Year: 2004-05]

For Appellant: Shri Himanshu Sinha, AdvFor Respondent: Shri Gangadhar Panda, CIT-DR

Section 10ASection 115JSection 143(3)Section 244A

such income which does not form part of a total income is contained in Section 10A; i.e. income of newly established undertakings in free trade zone, etc. Section 10A(1) provides, "Subject to the provisions of this section, a deduction of such profits and gains as are derived

Alcatel Lucent India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5554/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 920(3)Section 92D

special beneficial provision and the purpose of deduction under such Section is to encourage and boost the new business undertakings situated in the free trade zone of this Nation by providing suitable deductions to such business entities. Sometimes, while calculating the deduction, disputes arise regarding the methodology of deduction which

Alcatel Lucent India Ltd., Gurgaon vs. DCIT, New Delhi

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are allowed

ITA 5553/DEL/2011[2007-08]Status: HeardITAT Delhi16 Aug 2021AY 2007-08

Bench: Sh. Amit Shukladr. B. R. R. Kumar

For Appellant: Sh. Nageshwar Rao, AdvFor Respondent: Sh. Surenderpal, CIT DR

Section 10ASection 133(6)Section 143(3)Section 920(3)Section 92D

M/S Thomson Press (India) Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax- II

ITA - 124 / 2003HC Delhi09 Oct 2015

For Appellant: Mr SalilAggarwal, Mr Ravi Pratap Mall andFor Respondent: Mr Rohit Madan, Senior Standing counsel with

Section 10ASection 260ASection 263Section 80H

things during the previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 1981, in any free trade zone; (ii) it is not formed by the splitting up, or the reconstruction, of a business already in existence: Provided that this condition shall not apply ... been actually allowed the deduction in respect of depreciation for each of the relevant assessment years. (5) Where an industrial undertaking in any free trade zone has begun to manufacture or produce articles or things in any previous year relevant to the assessment year commencing on or after

M/S Thomson Press (India) Ltd vs. Commissioner of Income Tax -II

ITA - 83 / 2003HC Delhi09 Oct 2015

For Appellant: Mr SalilAggarwal, Mr Ravi Pratap Mall andFor Respondent: Mr Rohit Madan, Senior Standing counsel with

Section 10ASection 260ASection 263Section 80H

CIT vs. Ml Outsourcing Services Pvt Ltd

The appeal is dismissed

ITA - 1255 / 2011HC Delhi03 Sept 2014

Section 10ASection 143(3)

software during the previous year relevant to the assessment year: (a) commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 1981 in any free trade zone; or (b) commencing on or after the 1st day of April, 1994 in any electronic hardware technology park, or as the case