Calculation for grant of deduction u/s 37 (1) of the Income Tax Act for education cess

INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL
DELHI BENCH “I-1”: NEW DELHI

BEFORE SHRI AMIT SHUKLA, JUDICIAL MEMBER

AND

SHRI PRASHANT MAHARISHI, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
(Through Video Conferencing)

ITA No. 6558/Del/2016
(Assessment Year: 2010-11)

M/s. Honeywell International
(India) Pvt. Ltd, 1st Floor,
Unitech Trade Centre,
Sector-43, Block C, Sushant Lok
Phase-I, Gurgaon
PAN: AANCA7954K
(Appellant) 

Vs. 

Addl CIT
Range-4,
New Delhi
(Respondent)

ITA No. 6552/Del/2016
(Assessment Year: 2010-11)

Addl CIT,
Special Range-4,
New Delhi
PAN: AANCA7954K
(Appellant) 

Vs. 

M/s. Honeywell
International (India) Pvt. Ltd,
1st Floor, Unitech Trade
Centre, Sector-43, Block C,
Sushant Lok Phase-I,
Gurgaon
(Respondent)

ITA No. 5801/Del/2017
(Assessment Year: 2011-12)

DCIT,
Circle-11(1),
New Delhi
PAN: AANCA7954K
(Appellant)

Vs. 

M/s. Honeywell
International (India) Pvt. Ltd,
1st Floor, Unitech Trade
Centre, Sector-43, Block C,
Sushant Lok Phase-I,
Gurgaon
 (Respondent)

ITA No. 5770/Del/2017
(Assessment Year: 2011-12)

M/s. Honeywell International
(India) Pvt. Ltd, 1st Floor, Unitech
Trade Centre, Sector-43, Block
C, Sushant Lok Phase-I,
Gurgaon
PAN: AANCA7954K
(Appellant) 

Vs. 

DCIT,
Circle-11(1),
New Delhi
(Respondent)

Revenue by : Shri Rajan Vora, CA
Assessee by: Shri Deeraj Kr. Jain, Sr. DR

Date of Hearing 10/02/2021
Date of pronouncement 24/05/2021

O R D E R

PER PRASHANT MAHARISHI, A. M.

1. These are the four cross appeals of the same assessee for Assessment Year 2010-11 and 2011-12, these appeals also involve similar facts raising similar grounds, argued by both the parties together. Therefore, this bunch of appeals is disposed of by this common order.

2. For A Y 2010-11 ITA No 6562/Del 2016 is filed by Additional CIT, New Delhi (ld AO) against the order of ld CIT(A)-37, New Delhi dated 24.10.2016 in which following grounds of appeal is raised:-

“1. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) is erroneous and bad in law.

2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the ld CIT(A) was correct in directing to exclude the comparables namely M/s. Aptico and M/s TSR Darshaw Limited from the set of final comparables used by the TPO.”

3. For AY 2010-11 , Assessee in ITA No 6558/Del/2016 has raised following grounds of appeal.

“On the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Appellant respectfully craves to prefer an appeal against the order passed under section 250 of the Income-tax Act, 1961 (“the Act”) by Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeal) - 37, New Delhi (“Ld. CIT(A)”) on the following grounds: Corporate Tax Grounds

1. The Ld. CIT(A) has erred in, inter-alia, upholding Ld. AO‟s conclusions purely on presumptions and irrelevant considerations.

2. That on facts and in law, the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) erred in allocating an excess expenditure of INR 31,798,275 over and above expenditure of INR 3,595,995 already allocated by Appellant to the eligible unit under section 10A of the Act, thereby reducing the deduction claimed under section 10A of the Act.

2.1. That on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Ld. AO and Ld. CIT(A) while allocating excess expenditure of INR 3,17,98,275  to section 10A unit has wrongly restricted deduction under section 10A by equivalent amount without considering the impact of export turnover of INR 23,27,23,738 and total turnover of INR 23,78,53,908, thereby resulting in excess section 10A disallowance by INR 685,844.

To know more in details find the attachment file