ITO, New Delhi v. M/s. Annik Technology (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 158/DEL/2011 | 2007-2008
Pronouncement Date: 28-07-2011 | Result: Dismissed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 15820114 RSA 2011
Assessee PAN AAFCA5135Q
Bench Delhi
Appeal Number ITA 158/DEL/2011
Duration Of Justice 6 month(s) 17 day(s)
Appellant ITO, New Delhi
Respondent M/s. Annik Technology (P) Ltd., New Delhi
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 28-07-2011
Appeal Filed By Department
Order Result Dismissed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 28-07-2011
Date Of Final Hearing 25-07-2011
Next Hearing Date 25-07-2011
Assessment Year 2007-2008
Appeal Filed On 11-01-2011
Judgment Text
ITA NO.1 58/DEL/2011 1 IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL DELHI BENCH A NEW DELHI BEFORE SHRI R.P. TOLANI JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI SHAMIM YAHYA ACCOUNTANT MEMBER I.T.A. NO. 158/DEL/2011 A.Y. : 2007-08 INCOME TAX OFFICER WARD 1(4) ROOM NO. 380B CR BLDG. IP ESTATE NEW DELHI VS. M/S ANNIK TECHNOLOGY (P) LTD. A - 16/9 VASANT VIHAR NEW DELHI 57 (PAN/GIR NO. : AAFCA5135Q) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (APPELLANT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) (RESPONDENT ) ASSEESSEE BY : SH. VIKAS SRIVASTAVA ADV. DEPARTMENT BY : SMT. GEETMALA MOHANANEY C.I.T. (D.R.) ORDER ORDER ORDER ORDER PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM PER SHAMIM YAHYA: AM THIS APPEAL BY THE REVENUE IS DIRECTED AGAINST TH E ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) DATED 04.11. 2010 PERTAINING TO ASSESSMENT YEAR 2007-08. 2. THE ISSUE RAISED IS THAT ON THE FACTS AND CIRCU MSTANCES OF THE CASE THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HA S ERRED IN LAW AND ON FACTS IN ALLOWING THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IN RESPECT OF THE ISSUE OF CLAIM OF DEDUCTION U/S 10A AMOUNTING TO ` 2 62 19 240/- IGNORING THAT SINCE THE ASSESSEE DID NOT FULFIL THE CONDITION PRESCRIBED IN SECTION 10A(2)(I)(A) (B) (C) OF THE IT ACT 1961 THE BENEFITS OF THE SECTION CANNOT BE GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE. ITA NO.1 58/DEL/2011 2 3. IN THIS CASE THE ASSESSING OFFICER HAD DENIED THE ASSESSEE CLAIM OF SECTION 10A FOR THE REASONS THAT ASSESSEE WAS CA RRYING THE BUSINESS FROM SHIVALIK MALVIYA NAGAR NEW DELHI WHICH WAS NOT FALLING UNDER THE FREE TRADE ZONE. 4. UPON ASSESSEES APPEAL LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) NOTED THAT TRIBUNAL IN ASSESSEES OWN CA SE HAS CONSIDERED THE ISSUE OF SECTION 10A DEDUCTION FOR ASSESSMENT Y EAR 2005-06 (WHEN ASSESSEE WAS A FIRM) AND HELD AS UNDER:- 5. IN THE LIGHT OF THIS FINDING OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THAT ONLY 7 DAY TIME WAS GIVEN TO THE ASSESSEE TO OBTAIN THE CERTIFICATE WHICH IS NOT SUFFICIENT WE ARE OF THE CONSIDERED OPINION THAT ADDITIONAL EVIDENCE WAS RIGHTLY ADMITTED BY THE LD . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). IN VIEW OF THIS GROUND NO. 1 OF THE REVENUE IS REJECTED. REGARDING GROUND NO. 2 OF THE REVENUE WE FIND THAT LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS REPRODUCED THE CONTENTS OF LETTER DATED 12.3.2008 FROM STPL WHICH IS AS UNDER:- THE LOP ISSUED BY STPL IS IN ORDER WITH REGARD TO THE SCOPE OF SERVICES. THE SCOPE OF SERVICES INCLUDE SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND IT ENABLED SERVICES ALSO. THIS IS ON THE BASIS OF THE PROJEC T REPORT AND THE APPLICATION MADE BY YOUR FOR STPL REGISTRATION. ITA NO.1 58/DEL/2011 3 YOU MAY THEREFORE TAKE UP THE MATTER WITH INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES AND SUBMIT A COPY OF THIS LETTER TO THE INCOME TAX AUTHORITIES. WE WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY ONCE AGAIN THE ITEM OF MANUFACTURE COMPUTER SOFTWARE AS MENTIONED IN LOP ISSUED INCLUDES SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND IT ENABLED SERVICES WITH EFFECT FROM THE DATE OF LOP I.E. 14.3.2002. FURTHER WE CONFIRM THAT THE ACTIVITIES IN WHICH THE UNIT IS ENGAGED INCLUDING THE EXPORT EARNINGS FROM THE DATE OF THE LOP CONFIRM TO THE PERMISSION GRANTED UNDER THE LOP. THIS IS BEING ISSUED WITH THE APPROVAL OF COMPETENT AUTHORITY. (M.P. DUBEY) JT. DIRECTOR 6. AFTER REPRODUCING THE CONTENTS OF THIS LETTER DATED 12.3.08 IT HAS BEEN NOTED BY THE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) THAT AS PER THIS LETTER OF STPL MANUFACTURE OF COMPUTER SOFTWARE INCLUDES SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT AND IT ENABLED SERVICES WHICH IS THE ACTIVITY OF THE ASSESSEE AND IN VIEW OF THIS WE FIND NO REASON TO INTERFERE IN THE ORDER OF LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) REGARDING THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN GROUND NO. 2 OF THE ITA NO.1 58/DEL/2011 4 REVENUES APPEAL. WE THEREFORE REJECT THIS GROUND ALSO. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE REVENUE IS DISMISSED. 4.1 CONSIDERING THE ABOVE LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HELD THAT FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06 THE TRIBUNAL HAD DECIDED TO GIVE THE BENEFITS OF SECTION 10A TO THE ASSESSEE IN AN EARLIER ASSESSMENT YEAR. BY THE RULES OF CONSISTENCY THERE CAN BE NO DOUBT THAT THE MATTER STANDS SETTLED IN FAVOUR OF THE ASS ESSEE. 5. AGAINST THIS ORDER THE REVENUE IS IN APPEAL BEFO RE US. 6. WE HAVE HEARD BOTH THE COUNSEL AND PERUSED THE RECORDS. IT TRANSPIRES THAT IN ASSESSEES OWN CASE EARLIER THE TRIBUNAL HAD DECIDED THE ISSUE IN FAVOUR OF THE ASSESSEE AND TH E LD. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS) HAS FOLLOWED THE SAME. HE NCE WE DO NOT FIND ANY INFIRMITY IN THE ORDER OF THE LD. COMMISSION ER OF INCOME TAX (APPEALS). ACCORDINGLY WE UPHOLD THE SAME. 7. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL FILED BY THE REVENU E STANDS DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28/7/2011. SD/- SD/- [ [[ [R.P. TOLANI] R.P. TOLANI] R.P. TOLANI] R.P. TOLANI] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] [SHAMIM YAHYA] JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ACCOUNTANT MEMBER DATE 28/7/2011 SRB COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: COPY FORWARDED TO: - -- - 1. APPELLANT 2. RESPONDENT 3.CIT 4.CIT (A) 5. DR IT AT TRUE COPY BY ORDER ASSISTANT REGISTRAR ITAT DELHI BENCHES