AI OCR 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2011 (4) TMI 793
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ue raised the following common grounds in its appeals in ITA Nos. 316 to 320/H/2010: "1. The CIT(A) erred in ignoring the provisions under Rule 46A of the Income-tax Rules, 1962 by not remanding certain issues to the Assessing Officer. 2. The CIT(A) erred in endorsing the assessee's claim that provisions of Explanation (2) to section 10A(3) are not applicable in the matter of repatriation of the remittances into India. 3. The CIT(A) ought to have appreciated the fact that the RBI's letter of approval dated 31-7-2003 is applicable only for those invoices for which extension of time had been granted, but not for those which have not fallen due. 4. The CIT(A) erred in allowing exemption cl....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... us against allowing the deduction under section 10A of the Income-tax Act by the CIT(A). 4. The learned Departmental Representative has submitted that the export proceeding has not been received by the assessee within the stipulated time limit. Further, Form 56-F submitted by the assessee is defective and also there is no request for extension of time by the assessee and capitalisation of the export realisation by investment in Wholly Owned Subsidiary is not in accordance with the Rules of RBI. According to Assessing Officer, the assessee is not actually capitalised the export proceedings, on the other hand made some adjustment entries in the books of account as the amounts capitalised without actually contributing any share/equity capita....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....etails such as actual amount brought to India and balance amount to be brought to India in convertible foreign exchange. No evidence was furnished for extension beyond six months period in the form 56F. (b) Copies of the bank account statements of Andhra Bank was not furnished by the assessee without which it is not possible to verify the authenticity of receipt of the remittances in India. (c) The capitalisation of export receivables approved by the RBI as deemed realisation do not apply for the purpose of section 10A of the Act." 6. Since the CIT(A) has called for remand report on receipt of the additional evidence in the form of extension of time for receipt of monies beyond six months from RBI, it cannot be sa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....esent case, the remittance is within the prescribed time limit and the Explanation 2 is irrelevant. Further, FIRCs, being issued by the approved dealers of the foreign exchange which is good and sufficient evidence for remittance of foreign exchange into India and the same has to be accepted. Further, the approval for capitalisation granted by the RBI, the Assessing Officer in his remand report has stated that receivable cannot be deemed to be adequate for the purpose of benefit under section 10A even though the same is considered for foreign exchange laws. We have carefully gone through the facts of the case. Explanation 1 to section 10A(3) which has defined the competent authority as RBI and the competent authority being RBI authorise the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....hen the software has been incidental, the sale is not complete as many other jobs such as training, hand holding etc. are yet to be completed. Such events were considered as work in progress and only after the complete jobs are done, sale proceeds are realised from such instances. Till such time, the amounts spent on developing this software have been shown as work in progress and the same on realisation were transferred to Wholly Owned Subsidiary as investment. In our opinion, the work in progress/future receivables cannot be considered for deduction under section 10A. However, when these amounts on realisation were actually transferred to Wholly Owned Subsidiary as an investment within the extended time by RBI, it is to be considered for ....