TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2020 (1) TMI 291
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... of reports, telecom audit and cost reduction consultancy services to its clients. Assessee electronically filed its return of income for A.Y. 2011-12 declaring total loss of Rs. 75,51,891/-. The case was selected for scrutiny and thereafter assessment was framed u/s 143(3) of the Act vide order dated 28.03.2014 accepting the total income filed by the assessee. Subsequently, on examining the assessment records, the Ld.PCIT noticed that assessee had filed return of income declaring loss of Rs. 75,51,891/- and had claimed deduction u/s 10A of the Act to the tune of Rs. 1,02,28,453/-. He noted that AO had allowed the entire amount of deduction u/s 10A of the Act. He also noticed that assessee had carried forward losses of Rs. 19,34,774/- pert....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....PUN/2016 dismissed the appeal on account of non-prosecution of appeal by the assessee. Thereafter, assessee filed M.A. requesting for recalling the ex-parte order passed by the Tribunal. The Tribunal vide order in M.A.No.31/PUN/2019 dt.26.07.2019 recalled the ex-parte order dated 06.11.2018. Thus, the assessee is now before us in second round and had raised the follows grounds : "1. The learned Pr CIT-1, Pune erred in law and on facts in passing an order u/s 263 of the ITA, 1961. 2. The learned Pr CIT-1, Pune erred in law and on facts in treating the original assessment order passed u/s 143(3) of the ITA, 1961 by the Assessing Officer, as erroneous in so far as it is prejudicial to the interest of the revenue. 3. The learned Pr CIT-1,....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....the provisions of the said section and that Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of CIT Vs. Yokogawa India Ltd., reported in (2017) 391 ITR 274 has held the loss or unabsorbed depreciation is to be set off against profits of eligible units after the deduction u/s 10A of the Act has been allowed. He further submitted that the Hon'ble Apex Court has further held that the provisions of Sec.10A of the Act is a provision for deduction and the stage of deduction would be while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking under Chapter IV of the Act and not at the stage of computation of income under Chapter VI of the Act. In other words, he submitted that the deduction should be granted first and the set off of unabsorbed depreciation ....