Income Tax : Learn about Section 44AD, a simplified method to compute business income, excluding some entities. Thresholds and tax implications...
Income Tax : The Income-tax Act has prescribed time limit in respect of various procedures, applications, etc. (like time limit for filing an a...
Income Tax : Sunset date for claiming Income Tax exemption for SEZs – Time to further extend the sunset date mentioned under Section 10AA...
Income Tax : Section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (the Act for short) deals with special provision in respect of newly established undertaki...
Income Tax : Article discusses Exemption Under Special Provisions of Sections 10A, Section 10AA and Section 10B of Income Tax Act, 1961. A. Sec...
Income Tax : FM: Role of IT Sector is Crucial in Order to Promote E-Governance for Empowering Citizens; to Promote the Inclusive and Sustainabl...
Income Tax : Infosys Technologies Ltd. Tuesday said it will appeal against an order from the income tax department seeking more than 4 billion ...
Income Tax : ITAT Kolkata held that loss on sale of shares on recognized stock exchange with STT paid, is eligible to be set off against the lo...
Income Tax : Kerala High Court restores Cool Mind Technologies' income tax appeal, emphasizing ITAT's obligation to consider appeals on merits ...
Income Tax : Read about the ITAT Delhis ruling on the deduction dispute between Genpact India and DCIT regarding freight, telecommunication cha...
Corporate Law : NCLAT Delhi rules on the admissibility of a Section 7 application by State Bank of India against Advantage Overseas Pvt. Ltd., all...
Goods and Services Tax : Allahabad High Court held that penalty under Section 54(1)(2) of the U.P. VAT Act, 2008 cannot be imposed in cases, wherein, the a...
Income Tax : As per section 10A(4) of Income Tax Act, 1961, profits derived from export of articles or things or computer software shall be amo...
Income Tax : Circular No. 14/2014-Income Tax CBDT had issued Circular No.12/2014 dated 18th July, 2014 to clarify that mere transfer or re-dep...
Income Tax : Circular No. 12/2014-Income Tax Section 10AA of the Income-tax Act, 1961, inter-alia, provides for deduction in respect of the pr...
Income Tax : A clarificatory Circular No. 01/2013 dated 17.01.2013 was issued by CBDT to address various contentious issues leading to tax disp...
Income Tax : A clarificatory Circular No. 01/2013, dated 17-1-2013 (hereinafter referred to as 'Circular') was issued by CBDT to address variou...
Unless the foreign remittances are credited in the account of assessee or at least credited in the account of the bank, it can not be said that the export proceeds have been received in or brought into India. The assessee has placed on record a certificate from State Bank of India which only states that the proceeds of the foreign remittances had been credited to the account of the assessee.
The Proviso to s. 10A(1A) provides that no deduction under this section shall be allowed to an assessee who does not furnish a return of his income on or before the due date specified u/s 139(1). The assessee’s argument that the said Proviso is merely directory and not mandatory is not acceptable.
From a reading of section 10A(7A), it is clear that its provisions apply to a situation where an undertaking whose income is deductible under section 10A is transferred in a scheme of amalgamation or demerger before the end of the specified 10 years. In the present case the STPI undertaking of the assessee stands transferred in a scheme of demerger before the completion of the specified period and, therefore, provisions of section 10A(7A) apply.
Unit in SEZ will be covered by sub-section(6) to section 115JB of the Act irrespective of the fact that those units were claiming deduction u/s.10A of the Act. We also observe that benefit given to SEZ unit from the applicability of provisions of section 115JB has been withdrawn by the Finance Act, 2011 by inserting a proviso to section 115JB(6) of the Act,
Sub-section (3) of section 10A either before or after its substitution does not contemplate a break in the five succeeding assessment years in relation to which an assessee is entitled to avail of benefit under section 10A of the Act. Thus, in case of an assessee who had already started availing the benefit of section 10A of the Act in any assessment year prior to the coming into force of the substituted sub-section (3),
Since the provisions of section 10A and 10B are similar in nature and as the jurisdictional High Court decided the issue while considering the provisions of section 10B also respectfully following the above, we uphold the contention of assessee that carry forward business losses and depreciation cannot be set off to the profits of the undertaking while working the claim u/s 10B. Therefore, AO is directed to do the needful in light of the above principles laid down.
ection 10A, as it presently stands, though worded as deduction provision, is essentially and in substance an exemption provision. We have also held that the implication of an exemption provision is that the particular income which is exempt from tax does not enter the field of taxation and is not subject to any computation.
Reason behind disallowance of claim made by the assessee was that since the assessee had not claimed deduction under section 10A in the return filed under section 139(1), the proviso to section 10A debarred him from making any such claim in revised return. At this stage, it would be relevant to take note of the proviso under section 10A.
So far the question of benefit under s. 10B of the Act is concerned, the learned counsel for the appellant-assessee has submitted that the view as taken by the Tribunal cannot be sustained for the authoritative pronouncement of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ITO v. Arihant Tiles & Marbles (P.) Ltd. [2010] 186 Taxman 439 (SC) holding, inter alia, that step-wise activity of cutting marble blocks and converting into the polished slabs and tiles constituted manufacture or production in terms of s. 80-IA of the Act while distinguishing the decision in Aman Marble’s case (supra), and while observing, inter alia, held as under:
Various objections raised by AO as mentioned above have been verified by ld. CIT(A) and found that land and building and machineries are new. Capitals introduced by the Directors are from their own sources and not by transferring from M/s. Shagun. Out of 70 employees employed by assessee company, only 8 employees were related to M/s Shagun and this is not a reason that for employing the ex-employees of any other company curtails the benefit allowable to the assessee.
