2010 (9) TMI 1262

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....e of Rs. 55,736/- after claiming a deduction of Rs. 11,27,57,353/- u/s 10B of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as 'the Act' for short), was accepted u/s 143(1). This sum was claimed as exempt on the basis that the firm was engaged in the business of manufacture and export of articles ready to decorate products such as bouquets, and also Home and Office decorations, garlands, potpourris etc. While completing the assessment u/s 143(3), vide order dated 31.12.2009, the Assessing Officer determined a taxable income of Rs. 11,28,13,089/- by denying the benefit of deduction u/s 10B to the export profits. According to the Assessing Officer, the firm was not engaged in any manufacturing activity and further, it had been for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....a case of splitting or reconstitution as would take the assessee out of the benefits of Sec. 10B and accordingly, dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. 3.2 On going through the impugned assessment order for the assessment year 2007-08, it is seen that all the main issued raised by the appellant regarding the nature of activities carried on by the firm and the fact of non-violation of the provisions of Sec. 10B(2)(ii) were dealt with the appellate order for the assessment year 2005-06, cited supra. The facts and circumstances being the same for the assessment year 2007-08 also, the same views hold good. As regards the other point regarding the purchases of raw materials as claimed by the appellant firm for the accounting period relev....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....the case of Shri Rohit Tandon, Prop. M/s.Prajna (India) will be more relevant on this issue wherein it was held as under: "The Amritsar Bench has held that 'splitting' would also cover instances of diversion of business to the new unit. It held that the Legislature has imposed certain condition, viz export profits from new undertakings, etc, with an intent to simultaneously achieve higher export earnings and augment fresh investment in plant and machinery leading to additional capacities in the national economy. If one of the conditions is not fulfilled, the benefits of section 10B cannot be extended. " In the present case, there is no vast difference in the products handled by the company and the assessee firm and....