UNITEDHEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. ADDL. CIT, SPECIAL RANGE- 9, NEW DELHI

Bench: Shri N.K.Billaiya & Shri Kuldip Singh

4. Assessee carried the matter before the Ld. DRP by way of filing objections who has confirmed the addition by dismissing the objection. Feeling aggrieved the taxpayer has come up before the tribunal by filing the present appeal. 5. We have heard the ld. Authorized Representatives of the parties to the appeal, gone through the documents relied upon

UNITED HEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD.,NEW DELHI vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: 2011-12 Optum Global Solutions (India) Vs Dcit, Private Limited Circle-27(1), (Formerly Known As United Health Cr Building, Group Information Services Pvt. New Delhi. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Optum Global Solutions (India) Circle-27(1), Private Limited Cr Building, (Formerly Known As United Health New Delhi Group Information Services Pvt. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao & Shri S. Chakraborty, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anupam Kant Garg, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2020

4. Aggrieved with such order of the AO/DRP, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO/ DRP has erred in disallowing deduction under section 10A/10AA of the Act on interest income of INR 72,12,856 earned on Fixed Deposits

DCIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S UNITED HEALTH GROUP INFORMATION SERVICES PVT. LTD, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed and the appeal filed by the Revenue is partly allowed for statistical purposes

Bench: Shri R.K. Panda & Shri Amit Shuklaassessment Year: 2011-12 Optum Global Solutions (India) Vs Dcit, Private Limited Circle-27(1), (Formerly Known As United Health Cr Building, Group Information Services Pvt. New Delhi. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q Assessment Year: 2011-12 Dcit, Vs Optum Global Solutions (India) Circle-27(1), Private Limited Cr Building, (Formerly Known As United Health New Delhi Group Information Services Pvt. Ltd.), 11Th Floor, Tower A, Dlf Towers Jasola, Jasola District Centre, New Delhi. Pan: Aadca6769Q (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Nageshwar Rao & Shri S. Chakraborty, Advocates Revenue By : Shri Anupam Kant Garg, Cit, Dr Date Of Hearing : 16.06.2020 Date Of Pronouncement : 25.08.2020

4. Aggrieved with such order of the AO/DRP, the assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal by raising the following grounds:- “1. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the learned AO/ DRP has erred in disallowing deduction under section 10A/10AA of the Act on interest income of INR 72,12,856 earned on Fixed Deposits

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S VINEET SOOD & SONS (HUF), NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Amit Shuklain Ita No. 6205/Del/2015 Assessment Year: 2007-08 Acit Vs. Vineet Sood & Sons (Huf), Circle 28(1), G-53, Sarita Vihar, New New Delhi Delhi (Applicant) (Respondent) (Pan: Aaahv3031Q)

4. So far as the disallowance of deduction u/s 10B on the actual amount of duty drawback amounting to Rs. 41,92,238/-, the assessee’s submission before the CIT(A) had been that the duty drawback is in the nature of reimbursement of various duties paid by the assessee to the DTA suppliers on the purchase of various

PICRIC LTD vs. ITO WARD 14 (4),

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is allowed with directions contained in para 22 above

Bench: Shri G.S. Pannu, Hon’Ble & Ms. Astha Chandra

disallowance of insurance claims of Rs. 19,50,000/- in computing deduction under section 10B of the Act as also denial of benefit claimed by the assessee under Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) scheme amounting to Rs. 21,67,878/- in computing deduction under section 80HHC and both the grounds of appeal before the Tribunal relate thereto. 4

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI -II vs. KEI INDUSTRIES LIMITED

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

disallowed, as the income of this unit was exempt from tax. In response, the Assessee furnished its detailed submissions, which, however, were rejected by the AO who was of the opinion that as Section 10B was in Chapter-III of the Act, under the heading ―incomes which do not form part of total income‖, legislative intent was clear that such

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

disallowable under the various provisions of the Act. The fifth step is to claim any other allowance or deduction. This exercise gives the figure of profit or loss before deduction under Section 10A. Thereafter the assessee has to deduct the profits eligible under Section 10A. The form further prescribes the steps involved in the computation of total income. This shows

CIT vs. TEI TECHNOLOGIES PVT LTD

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

disallowable under the various provisions of the Act. The fifth step is to claim any other allowance or deduction. This exercise gives the figure of profit or loss before deduction under Section 10A. Thereafter the assessee has to deduct the profits eligible under Section 10A. The form further prescribes the steps involved in the computation of total income. This shows

ACIT, DEHRADUN vs. M/S. WINDLASS STEEL CRAFT, DEHRADUN

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 5506/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs M/S Windlass Steel Craft, Circle-1, 11-A, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafw0958M Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.09.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.11.2015 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

4). Hence looking into the above facts claim of assessee firm u/s 10B, Export Incentives and other disallowances made be allowed.” 6. The ld. CIT(A) after considering the submissions of the assessee observed that the AO misdirected himself in reading more in the statutory provision of Section

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. MRS. AMBIKA SADH, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the revenue are dismissed

Bench: Shri G.D. Agrawal & Shri Amit Shuklain Ita Nos. 6252 & 6253/Del/2015 Assessment Years: 2010-11 & 2011-12 Ito, Ward -29(4), Vs. Ambika Sadh Room No. 1013, 10Th Floor, Prop. M/S. Euro Expo. E-2 Block, Dr. S.P. Sukherjee C-57, M.B. Road, Civic Centre, Jln Marg, Lal Kuan Badarpur, Minto Road, New Delhi New Delhi (Applicant) (Respondent) (Pan: Aoqps4050C)

section 10B of the Income- tax Act exempts profits of the undertaking “from export" and not “entire profits.” 2. The brief facts are that the assessee was engaged in manufacturing and export of garments, make-ups and accessories from its export oriented unit (EOU) located in Noida. The assessee had declared net profit of Rs. 1,52,13,633/- which

M/S R SYSTEMS INTERNATIONAL LTD.,,NEW DELHI vs. ACIT, NEW DELHI

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

Bench: Shri N.K. Billaiya & Shri Sudhanshu Srivastava[A.Y 2011-12]

disallowance of legal and professional fee of Rs. 1,93,250 and foreign taxes of Rs 51,384/-. 3. Briefly stated, the facts of the case are that the assessee company is engaged into the business of software development and IT enables services, primarily export sales. 4. During the year under consideration, the assessee has declared total interest

NTT DATA GLOBAL DELIVERY SERVICES LTD.,BANGALORE vs. DCIT, NEW DELHI

The appeal of the assessee is partly allowed

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri Prashant Maharishintt Data Global Delivery Vs. Dcit, Services Ltd, Circle-13(1), No. 17, South End Road, New Delhi Bangalore Pan: Aabck7777J (Appellant) (Respondent)

disallowance of deduction under section 10 A, is required to be made on other income and miscellaneous income of the assessee. Accordingly, he held that INR 24 4340 5880/– is other income, though it can be assessed as the business income of the assessee. However same cannot be said to be the income derived from export-oriented undertaking. Therefore

M/S. ART BEAUTY EXPORT,NEW DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 10B of the Act. The Assessing Officer also passed assessment order for assessment year 2007-08 on 30.12.09 wherein following the earlier order for assessment year 2006-07, the claim of deduction u/s 10B of the Act was again disallowed. I.T.A.Nos.2531, 5702, 5703 & 924/D/2014 AYs: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 4

M/S. ARTS BEAUTY EXPORTS,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 10B of the Act. The Assessing Officer also passed assessment order for assessment year 2007-08 on 30.12.09 wherein following the earlier order for assessment year 2006-07, the claim of deduction u/s 10B of the Act was again disallowed. I.T.A.Nos.2531, 5702, 5703 & 924/D/2014 AYs: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 4

M/S. ARTS BEAUTY EXPORTS,DELHI vs. ITO, NEW DELHI

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 10B of the Act. The Assessing Officer also passed assessment order for assessment year 2007-08 on 30.12.09 wherein following the earlier order for assessment year 2006-07, the claim of deduction u/s 10B of the Act was again disallowed. I.T.A.Nos.2531, 5702, 5703 & 924/D/2014 AYs: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 4

ITO, NEW DELHI vs. M/S. ART BEAUTY EXPORTS, NEW DELHI

In the result, all three appeals of the assessee are allowed and appeal of the revenue is dismissed

Bench: Shri Chandra Mohan Garg & Shri L.P. Sahu

section 10B of the Act. The Assessing Officer also passed assessment order for assessment year 2007-08 on 30.12.09 wherein following the earlier order for assessment year 2006-07, the claim of deduction u/s 10B of the Act was again disallowed. I.T.A.Nos.2531, 5702, 5703 & 924/D/2014 AYs: 2006-07, 2007-08, 2008-09, 2009-10 4

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

4. The ground Nos. 1 to 1.2 of the appeal of the assessee relate to disallowance of ₹44,00,739/-, which was claimed by the assessee as deduction under section 35DD of the Act. ITA Nos. 5524 & 5525/Del/2013 4.1 The facts qua the issue in dispute are that the M/s. NIIT Ltd. was demerged pursuant to a scheme of demerger

ACIT, NEW DELHI vs. M/S NIIT TECHNOLOGIES LTD.,, NEW DELHI

In the result, both the appeals of the assessee are partly allowed and the appeal of Revenue for assessment year 2007-08

Bench: Shri Bhavnesh Saini & Shri O.P. Kant

4. The ground Nos. 1 to 1.2 of the appeal of the assessee relate to disallowance of ₹44,00,739/-, which was claimed by the assessee as deduction under section 35DD of the Act. ITA Nos. 5524 & 5525/Del/2013 4.1 The facts qua the issue in dispute are that the M/s. NIIT Ltd. was demerged pursuant to a scheme of demerger