TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (2) TMI 196
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....o levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C of the I T Act. 3.1 Levy of interest u/s 234B and 234C are mandatory and consequential in nature. Therefore, the same are dismissed. 4. In other grounds, namely, 2.1 to 2.5, the prayer of the assessee is that the deduction u/s 10A is to be granted as claimed. 5. Briefly stated the facts are as follows:- The assessee is a company. It is engaged in the business of providing software services. For the concerned asst. year return of income was filed on 21.10.2005 declaring an income of Rs.1,25,590/-, after claiming a deduction of Rs.2,60,801/- u/s 10A of the Act. The claim of deduction u/s 10A was made for the first time during the concerned asst.year. The claim was su....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e of establishment of a new undertaking. He further held that if it is to be taken that the assessee has set up a new unit, the assessee would not be satisfying the condition laid down in section 10A(2)(iii). The AO also rejected the contention of the assessee that the existing unit was converted into STP unit and therefore, it was entitled to deduction u/s 10A. The Tribunal order cited before the AO was not followed since according to him, the same had not attained finality and appeal before the Hon'ble High Court is pending consideration. 7. Aggrieved by the assessment completed, the assessee carried the matter in appeal before the first appellate authority. 8. Elaborate submissions were filed before the Commissioner, ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....he benefit of relief u/s 10A of the Act:- * Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax v Arabian Exports Ltd. (2007) 109 TTJ (Mumbai) 440; * Punjab Tractors Ltd. v Dy. CIT (2004) 89 TTJ (Chd) 439; * CIT v Hindustan Malleables and Forgings Ltd. (1991) 191 ITR 70 (Pat.); * CIT v Sree Krishna Pulversing Mills (2000) 163 CTR (AP) 151 : (2000) 241 ITR 262 (AP); * Mahindra Sintered Products Ltd. v CIT 177 ITR 111 (Bom.) and * JCIT v Gebbs Infotech Ltd. (2010) Tax Corp. (A.T.) 22873 (Mum.) 11. The learned DR on the other hand, strongly supported the impugned orders of the Income Tax authorities. 12. We have heard the rival submission and perused the material on record. An ident....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....wly set up. After hearing both the departmental representative and the authorized representative of the assessee, the Tribunal in the case of M/s Expert Outsource (P) Ltd. (supra), held as follows:- "We have heard the rival contentions and perused the material available on record. The Hon'ble Punjab and Haryana High Court in the case of Mahavir Spinning Mills Ltd. (supra), held that deduction u/s 10B would be available on conversion of existing unit into an export oriented unit (EOU). The contentions of the revenue authorities that provisions of section 10B(2) were not fulfilled on conversion of existing unit into EOU were negative by the High Court. The Tribunal, in the case of M/s Foresee Information Systems (P) Ltd. (....