N.K. Billaiya, Accountant Member - With this appeal the Revenue has challenged the correctness of the order of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-18, Mumbai dated April 30, 2013 pertaining to assessment year 2010-11.
2. The sole grievance of the Revenue is that the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to allow the assessee's enhanced claim of deduction under section 10A at 100 per cent against 50 per cent claimed by the assessee.
3. The short issue before us is that the assessee has wrongly claimed deduction under section 10A at 50 per cent of business income in place of 100 per cent eligibility.
4. During the course of the assessment proceedings, the assessee filed a revised computation of income claiming 100 per cent deduction to which it was eligible. The claim of the assessee was denied by the Assessing Officer. The Assessing Officer drew support from the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Goetze India Ltd. v. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323/157 Taxman 1.
5. The matter travelled before the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals). The learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) found that there is no dispute in so far as the eligibility of the claim is concerned. The assessee is very much eligible for 100 per cent deduction though in the return of income 50 per cent deduction was claimed. Drawing support from various decisions, the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) directed the Assessing Officer to allow the claim of deduction under section 10A at 100 per cent as claimed by the assessee.
6. Aggrieved by this, the Revenue is before us. This issue is no more res integra as it has been settled in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of the hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of CIT v. Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders (P.) Ltd. [2012] 349 ITR 336/208 Taxman 498/23 taxmann.com 23 (Bom.) wherein the hon'ble jurisdictional High Court has considered the decision of the hon'ble Supreme Court in the cases of Goetze India Ltd.(supra) and National Thermal Power Co. Ltd. v. CIT [1998] 229 ITR 383 and finally concluded that even if a claim is not made before the Assessing Officer, it can be made before the appellate authorities. The jurisdiction of the appellate authorities to entertain such a claim has not been negated by the Supreme Court in this judgment. In fact, the Supreme Court made it clear that the issue in the case was limited to the power of the assessing authority and that the judgment does not impinge on the power of the Tribunal under section 254 of the Act.
7. Respectfully following the ratio laid down by the hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in the case of Pruthvi Brokers and Shareholders (P.) Ltd. (supra), we decline to interfere with the findings of the learned Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals).
8. In the result, the appeal filed by the Revenue is dismissed.