2025 (2) TMI 1988

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....y the order passed by the co-ordinate bench of ITAT in ITA No.1613/Hyd/2017 dated 05.08.2024 ("impugned order"). 2. At the outset, the Ld.AR has submitted that, the Tribunal has committed a mistake by not following the decision of jurisdictional Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2012-13 and therefore, the order of the Tribunal is required to be recalled. 3. Per contra, Ld.DR submitted that, the Tribunal has given a cogent and reasoned reasoning while dismissing the ground of the assessee and it is not permissible for the Tribunal to revisit the issue on merits and accordingly, it was submitted that, the issue no.5 raised by the assessee is required to be dismissed. 4. We have heard the rival submissions and perused the mater....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....2) 136 ITD 177 was not considered by the ITAT while disallowing the deduction u/s.10A of the Act. Firstly, this decision of the Tribunal was not cited before us. Moreover, the issue before us is relating to the allowbility of deduction u/s 10A of the Act, whereas in the case of Marel Overseas Limited (surpa), the issue before the Special Bench was with respect to the deduction u/s 10B of the Act. In our considered opinion, the finding given by the Special Bench in respect to Section 10B of the Act cannot be mutatis and mutandis applicable to deduction u/s 10A of the Act and therefore, we do not find any merit in this submission also and accordingly this submission is also required to be dismissed. In view of the above, we do not find any re....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....ecord. This aspect has been considered by the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Reliance Telecom Ltd. (supra). 6. In the case of Reliance Telecom Ltd. (supra), Hon'ble Apex Court held that in a case where a detailed order was passed by the ITAT, the said order could not have been recalled by the Appellate Tribunal in exercise of powers under section 254(2) of the Act; that if the assessee was of the opinion that the order passed by the ITAT was erroneous, either on facts or in law, in that case, the only remedy available to the assessee was to prefer the appeal before the High Court; that, therefore, as such, the order passed by the ITAT recalling its earlier order which has been passed in exercise of powers under section 2....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....in from the total turnover for the purpose of computation of deduction under Section 10A of the Act. 6(c) Without prejudice to the above, erred in reducing the hedging gain of Rs.106,68,32,843 from the profits of the business instead of considering the net amount of Rs.63,66,53,406 credited to profit and loss account for the purpose of computing deduction u/s.10A of the Act." 7.1. In this regard, during the course of hearing, the Ld.AR has drawn our attention to Para 20.16 at page 851 of the paper book. On the basis of the above, it was submitted that the Tribunal while passing the order has not adjudicated the grounds and therefore, non-adjudication of the grounds raised by the assessee is a fatal and for that purposes, the ord....