Income Tax Appellate Tribunal - Chennai
Scientific Atlanta India Technology ... vs Department Of Income Tax on 9 August, 2010
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
CHENNAI BENCH 'D'
BEFORE DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT AND
SHRI HARI OM MARATHA, JUDICIAL MEMBER
I.T.A. No.1821/Mds/2010
Assessment Year : 2002-03
The Asstt. Commissioner M/s. Scientific Atlanta India
of Income Tax, Vs. Technology (P) Ltd.
Company Circle VI(1), ASV Suntech Part, 230A
Chennai Old Mahabalipuram Road
148 Ogglam, Thorapakkam
Chennai - 600 096.
PAN - AABCB 4448 F
(Appellant) (Respondent)
Department by : Shri K.E.B. Rengarajan
Jr. Standing Counsel
Assessee by : Dr. Anitha Sumanth
ORDER
PER DR.O.K.NARAYANAN, VICE PRESIDENT This is an appeal filed by the Revenue. The relevant assessment year is 2002-03. This appeal is directed against the order of the :- 2 -:
ITA No. 1821/Mds/2010
Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) at Chennai dated 09.08.2010 and arises out of the assessment completed under sec.143(3) read with sec.147 of the I.T. Act, 1961.
2. The first issue raised by the Revenue in this appeal is that the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the claim of the assessee that the deduction u/s 10A of the Act should be granted before setting off of loss of the other non eligible units against the profits of the eligible unit. As a matter of fact, this issue now stands concluded in favour of the assessee by the decision of the ITAT Chennai 'C' Special Bench. In the decision of the ITAT, Chennai rendered in assessee's own case dated 05.02.2010 in ITA Nos. 229/Mds/2007, ITA No. 352/Mds/2008 and ITA No. 536/Mds/2007 the Special Bench has held that the deduction u/s 10A of the Act has to be granted "stand alone basis"
without its profits being diluted by unabsorbed loss and depreciation of other non eligible units.
3. In view of the above decision of the Special Bench, we hold that the decision of the CIT(A) on this point is proper and just in law. The issue is decided, accordingly, against the Revenue.
4. The next ground raised by the Revenue is that the CIT(A) has erred in allowing the assessee's appeal against charging of interest u/s 234D of the Act. It is to be seen that this ground is incidental to the :- 3 -:
ITA No. 1821/Mds/2010
main ground mentioned above and as a consequence of the decision arrived at on the main issue, this ground has become otiose.
5. Further, in laws, the Hon'ble High Court of Delhi has held in a recent judgment by their Lordships that operation of section 234D of the Act is only prospective and it does not disturb the period prior to assessment year 2004-05. DIT Vs. Jacabs Civil Incorporated in ITA No. 491/2008 and others dated 30 August 2010. In the present case, we are concerned with assessment year 2002-03. Therefore, it is to be seen that section 234D of the Act itself is not applicable to the present case.
6. In the facts and circumstances of this case, this appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.
Order pronounced in the open court at the time of hearing on Monday, the 10th day of January, 2011 at Chennai.
Sd/- Sd/-
(HARI OM MARATHA) ( DR.O.K.NARAYANAN)
Judicial Member Vice-President
Chennai : 10th January, 2011
Vl.
Copy to:
Appellant /Respondent/CIT(A)/CIT/DR