Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Hyderabad
Dcit, Circle-16(2), Hyderabad, ... vs Ocimum Bio Solutions (India) Pvt. Ltd., ... on 30 December, 2016
ITA No 1199 of 2016 Ocimum Bio Solutions India Ltd Hyderabad
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
Hyderabad ' B ' Bench, Hyderabad
Before Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, Judicial Member
AND
Shri B. Ramakotaiah, Accountant Member
ITA No.1199/Hyd/2016
(Assessment Year: 2009-10)
Dy. Commissioner of Vs M/s. Ocimum Bio Solutions
Income Tax, Circle 16(2) (India) Ltd
Hyderabad Hyderabad
PAN: AAACO 4095 L
For Revenue : Smt. U. Minichandran, DR
For Assessee : Shri P. Murali Mohan Rao
Date of Hearing: 14.12.2016
Date of Pronouncement: 30.12.2016
ORDER
Per Smt. P. Madhavi Devi, J.M.
This is Revenue's appeal for the A.Y 2009-10. In this appeal, the assessee has raised the following grounds of appeal:
1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in holding that telecommunication charges should be excluded from the "Total Turnover" for the purpose of computing deduction u/s 10A.
2. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the CIT (A) erred in deleting the disallowance made u/s 14A by holding that assessee did not earn any exempt income.Page 1 of 3
ITA No 1199 of 2016 Ocimum Bio Solutions India Ltd Hyderabad
3. The appellant prays that the order of the CIT (A) on the above grounds be set aside and that of the AO be restored".
2. As regards Ground No.1, we find that this issue is covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Karnataka High Court in the case of CIT vs. Tata Elxsi Ltd & Anr. reported in 349 ITR 98 (Kar) and the CIT (A) has followed the same for giving relief to the assessee. In view of the same, we see no reason to interfere with the same. Ground of appeal No.1 is accordingly rejected.
3. As regards Ground No.2 we find that the AO has made the disallowance u/s 14A of the Act stating that the assessee has made investment by acquiring shares and has also borrowed funds from different banks on which the assessee has paid interest and claimed the same as a deduction. The learned CIT (A) has brought out in his order that there is no income derived by the assessee which is not part of the total income during the relevant A.Y. The CIT (A) has also relied upon the decision of the Coordinate Bench of this Tribunal in the case of Prathista Industries Ltd to hold that where there is no exempt income during the relevant A.Y, the provisions of section 14A will not apply. The Tribunal in the case of Prathista Industries Ltd had followed the Hon'ble Delhi High Court judgment in the case of Cheminvest Ltd reported in (2015) 378 ITR 33 (Del.). Therefore, we see no reason to interfere with the order of the CIT (A) on this issue as well and ground No.2 is also rejected.
Page 2 of 3ITA No 1199 of 2016 Ocimum Bio Solutions India Ltd Hyderabad
4. In the Result, Revenue's appeal is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the Open Court on 30th December, 2016.
Sd/- Sd/-
(B. Ramakotaiah) (P. Madhavi Devi)
Accountant Member Judicial Member
Hyderabad, dated 30th December, 2016.
Vinodan/sps Copy to:
1 Dy. CIT, Circle 16(2), 2nd Floor, B Block, I.T. Towers, AC Guards, Masab Tank. Hyderabad 2 M/s. Ocimum Bio Solutions (India) Ltd, Royal Demeur, Plot No.12/2, Sector-1, Huda Techno Enclave Hyderabad 3 CIT (A)-4 Hyderabad 4 Pr. CIT - 4 Hyderabad 5 The DR, ITAT Hyderabad 6 Guard File By Order Page 3 of 3