EPZ unit conversion into SEZ and 10A/10AA tax holiday start date, deduction allowed; foreign agent TDS issue remanded

Deduction under ss. 10A/10AA turned on whether conversion of an existing EPZ unit into an SEZ unit constitutes "beginning to manufacture" in the SEZ so as to trigger a fresh tax holiday. The ITAT held it does not: manufacturing had commenced earlier, and conversion was not a new undertaking; s. 10A(1A) applies to newly set-up SEZ units, while converted units remain governed by s. 10A(1) until s. 10AA becomes operative. In light of s. 10A(7B) and the scheme introducing s. 10AA, the assessee was held eligible for deduction under s. 10AA(1)(ii) for the year, subject to conditions. Disallowance under s. 40(a)(i) r/w s. 9(1)(vii) for alleged failure to deduct TDS u/s 195 on foreign agent commission was remanded to CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

---

---

Issues Involved:
1. Adequate opportunity to the Assessee.
2. Denial of deduction under Section 10AA of the Income Tax Act.
3. Application of Section 40(a)(i) with respect to payments.
4. Disallowance of sales commission paid to foreign agents.

Detailed Analysis:

1. Adequate Opportunity to the Assessee:
The assessee argued that the CIT(A) passed the order without providing an adequate opportunity to represent the matter. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) based the order on written submissions made during the first hearing and adjourned the matter to various dates, including 27/07/2017, which was acknowledged by the department. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) did not provide the right of audience to the assessee, which is contrary to the principles of law.

2. Denial of Deduction under Section 10AA:
The assessee claimed a deduction of Rs. 47,19,678/- under Section 10AA for the assessment year 2011-12. The AO disallowed this deduction, stating that the assessee had already availed of the benefit under Section 10A for ten consecutive assessment years from AY 2001-02 to AY 2010-11. The AO held that the unit is not eligible for deduction under Section 10AA as it began manufacturing in AY 2001-02, not AY 2006-07 onwards. The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance. However, the Tribunal observed that the assessee's unit, initially in MEPZ, converted into an SEZ unit effective from 01.01.2003. The Tribunal noted that the assessee claimed deduction under Section 10A for ten years and switched to Section 10AA from AY 2011-12. The Tribunal found that the assessee is entitled to deduction under Section 10AA for the unexpired period of ten consecutive assessment years and further for five years under Section 10AA(1)(ii), subject to other conditions.

3. Application of Section 40(a)(i):
The AO disallowed sales commission of Rs. 34,98,309/- paid to foreign agents for procuring sales orders, citing non-deduction of TDS under Section 195 read with Section 40(a)(i) and Section 9(1)(vii). The AO classified the payments as "fees for technical services." The CIT(A) upheld this disallowance, noting the absence of evidence from the assessee to prove otherwise. The Tribunal observed that the assessee did not provide written submissions before the CIT(A) but had made elaborate arguments in the statement of facts and grounds of appeal. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) failed to pass a speaking and reasoned order on merits and remanded the matter back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication on merits.

4. Disallowance of Sales Commission Paid to Foreign Agents:
The Tribunal noted that the assessee entered into agreements with foreign agents for sales commission and argued that these payments do not fall under "fees for technical services" as per Section 9(1)(vii) and relevant DTAAs. The Tribunal found that the CIT(A) dismissed the appeal without proper adjudication on merits. The Tribunal remanded the issue back to the CIT(A) for fresh adjudication, allowing the assessee to produce evidence and explanations in its defense.

Conclusion:
The Tribunal allowed the appeal for statistical purposes, directing the CIT(A) to provide an adequate opportunity to the assessee and to adjudicate the issues on merits, considering the legal provisions and evidence presented.

---