2018 (7) TMI 1915

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....learned CIT(A) has erred in not affording an opportunity of hearing to the appellant and in passing an ex parte order despite the fact that adjournment application was filed by the appellant, which is in violation of the Principles of Natural Justice. 2. The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the action of AO in reopening the assessment u/s 147 of the Act, On the facts and circumstances of the case, learned CIT(A) ought to have held that the action of reopening is without jurisdiction and not permissible either in law or on facts. 3. The learned CIT(A) has erred both in law and on the facts of the case in confirming the action of AO of disallowing exemption of Rs. 4,26,940/- (AY....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ibed conditions. Explanation 2(iv) below to the said section defines a "hundred percent export oriented undertaking" as an undertaking so approved by the Board appointed in this behalf by the Central Government under section 14 of the Industries Development and Regulation Act, 1951. Subsequent to the delegation of this power by the Ministry of Commerce and Industries to the Development Commissioners, such approvals to 100 per cent EOU's are now being granted by the Development Commissioners, which are later ratified by the Board of Approvals. The matter regarding validity of approvals given by Development Commissioners has been examined in the Board it has been decided that an approval granted by the Development Commissioner in....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... Scheme. In the present case, it is not in dispute that the permission/approval granted by the Development Commissioner has been ratified by the Board of Approval, may be subsequently. The moment the decision/approval of the Development Commissioner is ratified by the Board of Approval it will relate back to the date on which the approval was granted by the Development Commissioner. If that be so, it cannot be said that the assessee was not a export oriented unit, which was entitled to the deduction under section 10B of the Act. Incidentally it is to be noted that in the subsequent circular No. 68 issued by the Export Promotion Council for EOUS and SEZS, dated May 14, 2009, it mentions that from 1990 onwards the Board of Approval had delega....