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 : Read the ITAT Mumbai's order in DCIT vs. Infrasoft Technologies Ltd., where exemption under Section 10A of the Income Tax Act was ...
Corporate Law : Madras High Court held that Section 10-A of the Insolvency and Bankruptcy Code, 2016 cannot be extended to cases where default con...
Income Tax : Assessee was entitled to the exemption under Section 10A as ex-post facto approval granted by the RBI, the competent authority und...
Income Tax : ITAT Chennai held that Form 56F not signed by an accountant, as referred in section 10A(5) of the Income Tax Act, is defective and...
Income Tax : On appeal CIT (A) held that disallowance u/s 10AA can be made only when the total income is enhanced by the AO or TPO. Co-ordinate...
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...
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.
Ostensibly, while denying the assessee’s claim of carried forward unabsorbed loss/depreciation assessed under the normal provisions of the Act, the Assessing Officer has proceeded on the basis that section 10A of the Act provides an exemption and, therefore, loss suffered in such unit is not allowed to be set off or carried forward for further set off against other normal business income.
Section 10A is a provision which is in the nature of a deduction and not an exemption. This was emphasised in a judgment of a Division Bench of this Court while construing the provisions of Section 10B in Hindustan Unilever Ltd Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax 2. (2010) 325 ITR 102 at para 24.
Plain reading of above provisions makes it abundantly clear that for the purposes of section 10A, the eligible business (appellant’s branch office in this case) is to be considered as a separate entity and transfer of goods or services by eligible business to/from other business of the assessee are to be treated as if such transfer has been made to/from an unrelated third party. Therefore, supply of software by appellant’s branch office to appellant’s head office is to be considered as export to an unrelated third party and profits derived by appellant from such export are eligible for exemption u/s 10A of the Act.
ITAT held that tax withholding provisions under section 195 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (the Act) are not applicable to payments made by the Indian head office to its foreign branch, as both are ‘residents’ according to the Indian Income-tax Act, 1961 and the relevant Double taxation avoidance agreement (the tax treaty) between India and the US. Furthermore, sales made by the Indian HO to its foreign branch are eligible for deduction under section 10A of the Act and are therefore to be included in the ‘export turnover’ when calculating deduction under section 10A of the Act of the Act.
