TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2016 (1) TMI 707
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....at the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is contrary to law, facts and circumstances of the case and at any rate is opposed to the principles of equity, natural justice and fair play. 2. For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) failed to appreciate that the order of the Assessing Officer is without jurisdiction. 3. For that the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in holding that the software expenses claimed by the appellant were capital in nature. 4. For that the Commissioners of Income Tax (Appeals) erred in rejecting the appellant's contention that UPS are energy saving devices and consequently in restricting depreciation on UPS at 60% instead of allowing depreciation at the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....nergy saying devises and hence eligible for higher rate of depredation @ 80%. The UPS systems are required for operations of the computers. Hence the UPS becomes part and parcel of the computer systems once they are attached to the computers. Hence they are legible for depreciation @ 60% being the depreciation available for computers. There are several pronouncements in this regard, including Delhi High Court and the jurisdictional ITAT, where it was held that UPS also forms part of the computer system and, therefore, eligible for depreciation @ 60%. Some of the decisions are as under - (i) ITA No.99/Mds/2010 (ITAT Chennai) in the case of IOB. (ii) ITA No.3606jMumj2011 (ITAT Mumbai) in the case of Saraswat Infotech Ltd. ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....uphold the same and reject the grounds of appeal of the assessee on this issue.. 8. In ground no.5, the assessee is challenging the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in holding that assessee is not eligible for deduction under section 10B of the Act. Alternatively in ground no.6 and 7, it was the contention of the assessee that assessee is eligible for deduction under section 10A of the Act. Therefore, Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) should have allowed the deduction under section 10A of the Act. 9. The Assessing Officer at page 7 in para 16 of the assessment order observed that when show cause notice dated 14.03.2013 was issued to the assessee to show cause as to why its claim of deduction under section 10B of th....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....as held by the High Court of Delhi in the case of CIT v s Regency Creations Ltd (2012)(27 Taxmann 322)(Del). The Hon'ble High Court also has held that "approval granted to a 100% EOU set up under Software Technology Park Scheme cannot be deemed to be an approval under section l0B" . 4.3.4 In view of the above reasons and the decision of the Delhi High Court in the case of CIT Vs Regency Creations Ltd (reported in 27 Taxmann 322 (2012), I am of the considered opinion that in the absence of approval from the "Inter-Ministerial Standing Committee, the assessee is not eligible for deduction u/s.10B of the Act. therefore, the action of the Assessing Officer in rejecting the assessee's claim of deduction u/s.10B of the Act is as per the la....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....tion. 12. On going through the provisions of section 10A and sub-clause 2(i)(b) and also sub-section (2)(i) (c) of section 10A, we find considerable force in the submissions of the counsel for the assessee. We are of the view that Assessing Officer and Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) have completely overlooked the provisions in rejecting the claim of the assessee that it is not entitled for deduction under section 10A of the Act. Thus, we restore this issue to the file of the Assessing Officer for thorough examination and decide the issue in accordance with law i.e. whether the assessee is entitled for deduction under section 10A of the Act or not. 13. The next issue in the grounds of appeal of the assessee is that the disallowan....