Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Mumbai
Niru Jewels P.Ltd, Mumbai vs Assessee on 27 April, 2016
आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, मुंबई न्यायपीठ 'फी', मुंबई । IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "B", BENCH MUMBAI BEFORE SHRI R.C.SHARMA, AM & SHRI PAWAN SINGH, JM आमकय अऩीर सं./ITA No.1468/Mum/2014 ( नििाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2008-09) M/s Niru Jewels Pvt. Vs. DCIT(OSD-1), Mumbai-400020 Ltd. Unit No.704, Tower-1, SEEPZ SEZ, Andheri(East), Mumbai-
400096 स्थामी रेखा सं ./ जीआइआय सं ./ PAN/GIR No. : AABCN 8598 A (अऩीराथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) ननधाारयती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri B.V.Jhaveri याजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri N.P.Singh सुनवाई की तायीख / Date of Hearing : 07/04/2016 घोषणा की तायीख/Date of Pronouncement 27/04/2016 आदे श / O R D E R PER R.C.SHARMA (A.M):
This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A)-
Mumbai, for the assessment year 2008-2009.
2. In this appeal, the assessee is aggrieved for restricting the claim of deduction u/s.10A to the extent of exports sale proceeds received upto 30-9-2008 on the plea that necessary extension of time to receive foreign exchange from RBI was not obtained by the assessee. Accordingly, CIT(A) held that export turn over eligible for deduction u/s.10A is restricted to the turnover of Rs.98,38,23,087/- as against turnover of Rs.125,55,29,231/-.
2ITA No.1468/14
3. Rival contentions have been heard and record perused. Facts in brief are that assessee company is engaged in business of manufacturing and export of diamond studded jewellery. Its claim for deduction u/s.10A was restricted by CIT(A) to the extent of receipt of foreign exchange uptil 30-9-2008. It was argued by ld. AR that RBI has already issued circular in respect of units situated in SEZ(Special Economic Zone), relaxing the realisation to the exports proceeds. Reliance was also placed on the decision of coordinate bench in the case of Tara Jewels Exports Pvt. Ltd., ITA No.662/Mum/2012, dated 29-1-2014, wherein it was held that after the RBI have clarified that it has not stipulated any time period for the realisation of sale proceeds for SEZ units, it can only be considered as having allowed and indefinite period for the same. Consequently, it cannot be said that the condition of Section 10A was not satisfied.
4. We have considered rival contentions and found that deduction u/a.10A was restricted to the extent of export receipts realised uptll 30-9- 2008. The assessee company is situated In SEZ, the RBI, the Competent Authority, u/s.10A(3) of the Act had vide its Circular bearing A.P. -(DIR Series) Circular No:91 dated 1st April, 2003 relaxed the realization of export proceeds, which reads as under:
"In terms of para II(c) of AP (DIR Series) Circular No.28 dated March 30, 2001, units situated in Special Economic Zones have been permitted to realise and repatriate to India the full value of goods or software within a period of twelve months from the date of export. It has now been decided to remove the stipulation of twelve months or extended period thereof for realization of export proceeds. Accordingly, there shall be no prescription of any time limit for realization of exports made by units in SEZs. However, the units in SEZs will continue to follow the GR/PP/SOFTEX export 3 ITA No.1468/14 procedure outlined in Part B of Annexure to A.P .(DIR Series) Circular No.12 dated September 9, 2000 as amended from time to time.
Further, we found that the Tribunal, Mumbai Bench, in the case of ACIT vs. Tara Jewels Exports Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No.662/Mum/2012 for A.Y. 2003- 04 dated 29th January, 2014 held as under (page - 9):
"Once, therefore, the RBI has clarified that it has not stipulated any time period for the realization of the sale proceeds for the SEZ units, as the assessee. it can-only be considered as having allowed an indefinite time period for the same. Consequently, it cannot be said that the condition of section 10A(3) is' not satisfied. The objection of the Revenue is, in our view, not valid."
In view of the above, we restore the matter back to the file of AO for recomputing eligible deduction after considering the RBI Circular and also considering the decision of coordinate bench as discussed above.
5. In the result, appeal of the assessee is allowed for statistical purposes.
Order pronounced in the open court on this 27/04/2016.
Sd/- Sd/-
(PAWAN SINGH) (R.C.SHARMA)
न्यानयक सदस्य / JUDICIAL MEMBER ऱेखा सदस्य / ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक Dated 27/04/2016
प्र.कु.मभ/pkm, नन.स/ PS
आदे श की प्रनिलऱपप अग्रेपषि/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. अऩीराथी / The Appellant
2. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent.
3. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A), Mumbai.
4. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT
5. ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR, ITAT, Mumbai
6. गार्ा पाईर / Guard file. आदे शािसार/ BY ORDER, सत्मावऩत प्रनत //True Copy// उप/सहायक पुंजीकार (Asstt. Registrar) आयकर अपीऱीय अधिकरण, भुंफई / ITAT, Mumbai