TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>ITAT Upholds Deduction under Income Tax Act Sec. 10B</h1> <h3>ACIT, Circle-1, Udaipur Versus M/s. Advaiya Solutions Pvt. Ltd.</h3> ACIT, Circle-1, Udaipur Versus M/s. Advaiya Solutions Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues:1. Disallowance of deduction under sec. 10B of the Act due to lack of generic names of principal products.2. Disallowance of deduction under sec. 10B of the Act for failure to bring sale proceeds of computer software within the specified time frame.Issue 1: Disallowance of deduction under sec. 10B for lack of generic names:The Revenue appealed against the deletion of disallowance of deduction under sec. 10B by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The Revenue argued that each assessment year is distinct, and the principle of res-judicata does not apply. The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction as the assessee failed to provide generic names of three principal products with item code numbers. However, the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) allowed the appeal, stating that the appellant fulfilled all conditions for claiming the deduction since the first assessment year in 2006-07. The Commissioner held that the issue was consistent across assessment years, and no new material was presented to suggest a change in the appellant's activities. The ITAT upheld the Commissioner's decision, emphasizing the importance of maintaining consistency in decisions unless there are factual changes necessitating a different outcome.Issue 2: Disallowance of deduction under sec. 10B for late receipt of sale proceeds:The Revenue contested the deletion of disallowance of deduction under sec. 10B amounting to a specific sum due to the late receipt of sale proceeds of computer software. The Assessing Officer disallowed the deduction as the sale proceeds were not brought within the prescribed time frame. The assessee argued that the Reserve Bank of India extended the time limit to 12 months, and the sale proceeds were received within this period. The Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) considered the submissions and the Assessing Officer's report, which verified the timely receipt of sale proceeds. Consequently, the Commissioner allowed the deduction, finding no grounds for disallowance. The ITAT upheld this decision, noting that the sale proceeds were received within the extended period specified by the Reserve Bank of India, making them eligible for deduction under sec. 10B.In both issues, the ITAT upheld the decisions of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), emphasizing the importance of consistency in tax assessments and the fulfillment of statutory conditions for claiming deductions under sec. 10B of the Income Tax Act.
TaxTMI 