2013 (1) TMI 1076

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....(A) has erred in allowing relief to the assessee to the extent impugned in the grounds enumerated below: 1. on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing assessee's appeal in spite of the fact that there was a deliberate act of evasion on the part of the assessee in spite of completion of tenure for claiming exemption u/s 10B not only for the current year but in subsequent year also, which could have been unnoticed had there been no scrutiny assessment during the current year. 2. On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. CIT(A) erred in allowing assessee's appeal on the basis that obtaining approval from concerned authority is a technical issue but on the contra....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

...., deduction under section 10B was disallowed on the ground that the approval granted to the assessee, which made entitled the assessee for deduction under section 10B had expired on 31/3/2005. Concealment penalty has been initiated by the department on the disallowance made under section 10B of the Act. Ld. CIT(A) has deleted such concealment penalty on the ground that deduction was claimed by the assessee on the basis of certificate issued by Chartered Accountant in Form 56G; the approval of 100% EOU expired after 31/3/2005 and assessee could not get extension of approval; the assessee made exports, received foreign exchange and claimed deduction under section 10B; in the assessment order income assessed for the year under the normal provi....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... of the Act. He in this regard relied upon the decision of Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT vs. Nalwa Sons Investment Ltd. 327 ITR 543 (Del), wherein it has been held that when computation of income was made under section 115JB, and there was loss under the normal provision, concealment, if any, did not lead to tax evasion at all and, therefore, penalty under section 271(1)(c) of the Act could not be imposed. He submitted that department had preferred a SLP against the said order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court and it has been dismissed by Hon'ble Supreme Court vide order dated 4/5/2012. He submitted before us a copy of the dismissal of SLP and a copy was also given to Ld. DR. 7. We have heard both parties and their contention....