TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (1) TMI 1637
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....9/2010. 2. The main ground raised by the Assessee read as under:- 1. DEDUCTION U/S 10B 1.1 By disallowing the claim of deduction of Rs. 7,03,87,701/- u/s 10B of the Act. 1.2 By concluding that business of the Appellant had commenced in A.Y 1992-93 whereas the Appellant had commenced business from. A.Y 1998-99 and has failed to appreciate that deduction u/s 10B is allowed for a period of 10 years starting from the year of commencement of business of an undertaking and not the assessee. 1.3 By concluding that 100% export oriented undertaking of the Appellant is not a newly established undertaking. 1.4 By concluding that the Appellant is not registered with the competent Board as specified in Section 10B of the Act. 1.5 By....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....mption u/s 10B of the Act to the assesssee with following operative para of the impugned order:- " In the case of the assessee, neither the period of five years nor the block period of eight years expired when the amendment replacing the word 'ten' for 'five' was introduced by IT (Second amendment) Act, 1998 w.e.f 1/4/1999. Since the assessee was entitled to exemption in the year in which amendment became effective & operative, the assessee will be entitled to the extended period of exemption because the period of five years had not exhausted up to assessment year 1999-2000. Since the right of the assessee was continuing in the year of amendment and was not lost on the date when the amendment came into existence, the view taken by the Ld....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... assesssee got approval as 100% EOU as per approval dated 27/1/1997. We further observe that in the impugned order, the Commissioner of Income Tax (A) has held that the Assessing Officer was completely in error in holding that since the assessee started its business in A.Y 1992-93 then the prescribed period of 10 years for the purpose of exemption u/s 10B of the Act had come to an end by A.Y 2001-02. We also observe that the said Section 10B of the Act had come to an end by A.Y 2001-02. We also observe that the said Section 10B envisages setting up of export oriented undertaking which is altogether different and distinct from setting up of a normal commercial activity unit. The Assessing Officer has not controverted the fact that the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....red in favour of the Assessee by this order. Hence, we hold that the authorities below were not justified in rejecting the claim of the Assessee for deduction u/s 10B of the Act. For the year under consideration i.e Assessment Year 2006-07. In view of above main Ground No. 1 to 1.6 of the Assessee are allowed. Corporate Tax Adjustment: Rs. 7,03,87,701/- 5. Since in the earlier part of this order, we have decided that the Assessee is entitled for deduction u/s 10B of the Act. Therefore, the Assessing Officer is directed to decide the issue in the light of our conclusion pertaining to Ground NO. 1 to 1.6 of this appeal. With these directions, the issue of Corporate Tax Adjustment is restored to the file of Assessing Officer to pass an a....