Gujarat High Court
Commissioner vs Prodigy
Author: Akil Kureshi
Bench: Akil Kureshi
TAXAP/742/2010 3/ 3 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL No. 742 of 2010 ========================================================= COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III - Appellant(s) Versus PRODIGY INFOSOFT PVT LTD - Opponent(s) ========================================================= Appearance : MRS MAUNA M BHATT for Appellant(s) : 1, MR SN SOPARKAR, SR. ADV WITH MRS SWATI SOPARKAR for Opponent(s) : 1, ========================================================= CORAM : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI and HONOURABLE MS JUSTICE SONIA GOKANI Date : 25/01/2012 ORAL ORDER
(Per : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE AKIL KURESHI) Revenue is in appeal against the judgment of the Tribunal dated 13.11.09 raising following question for our consideration :
"Whether the Appellate Tribunal is right in law and on facts in allowing the claim of the assessee u/s.10A amounting to Rs.11,75,166/-?"
Issue pertains to deduction under section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The assessee claimed such deduction. The Assessing Officer called upon the assessee to justify such claim. In the assessment order, dated 28.3.05, the assessing Officer detailed various reasons why, according to him, the assessee did not satisfy the conditions for claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act. The assessee carried the issue in appeal. CIT(A) reversed the order of the Assessing Officer and held that the assessee had fulfilled all the conditions. Thereupon the Revenue approached the Tribunal which dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. Therefore, the present appeal by the Revenue.
Having heard the learned counsel for the parties and having perused the documents on record, sole question which arose in the appeal is whether the assessee had fulfilled necessary conditions for claiming deduction under section 10A of the Act. CIT(A) considered the evidence on record at considerable length and reversed the order of the Assessing Officer recording a finding that the assessee had satisfied all the requirements. The Tribunal further approved the decision of the CIT(A) making following observations.
"8. We have given our careful consideration to the rival submissions made before us and have perused the orders of authorities below. It is pertinent to note that various objections raised by the A.O. in the assessment order for denying the exemption under section 10A were duly conferred before the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals). The assessee-company registered with the Software Technology Parks of India (STPI) and approved as 100% Export oriented unit for Software. In this year, there was a change of name, which is also duly approved by the ROC. Copy of declaration of Software export through data communication link with the company in SOFTEX from the Software Technology Park of India along with purchase orders made by the customers, confirmation of the same, invoice raised to clients and foreign inward remittance certificates from banks confirming receipt of money in the form of foreign exchange were furnished. Certificate regarding qualification of both the Directors was also furnished. The assessee company has made genuine exports, earned foreign exchange, which is not doubted by any other authorities except the A.O. Keeping in view the totality of the facts and circumstances of the case, in our opinion, the Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) has given cogent reason indirecting the A.O. To allow th4 exemption under section 10A of the Income Tax Act, 1961. We therefore, inclined to uphold the order of Learned Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)."
To our mind, the entire issue is in the realm of appreciation of facts and the materials on record. CIT(A) and the Tribunal concurrently found that all necessary conditions are fulfilled. We do not find any question of law arising. Tax Appeal is therefore dismissed.
(Akil Kureshi J.) (Ms.Sonia Gokani, J.) (vjn)