COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX Vs. DECO DE TREND

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The issues raised in the above Tax Case (Appeals) filed by the Revenue as against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal are identical in respect of the self-same assessee. Following are the questions of law arise for consideration in the above Tax Case (Appeals):

(2.) T.C.(A)No.299 of 2010 relates to the assessment year 2005-2006. T.C.(A)Nos.804 of 2010 and 805 of 2010 relate to the assessment years 2004-05 and 2006-07 respectively and T.C.(A)No.342 of 2012 relates to the assessment year 2008-09. The Tribunal passed separate orders for the assessment years 2005-06 and 2008-09 and common order for the assessment years 2004-05 and 2006-07. Since the facts are common, for convenient sake, we are referring to the facts relating to T.C.(A)No.299 of 2010.

(3.) The assessee is a partnership firm. In the returns filed, it claimed deduction under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act in respect of the income earned on the export of handicraft items of dried flowers and parts of plants. Admittedly, the assessee is a 100% EOU having three units at Mananjery, Kunrathur and Moonramkattalai. There is also a closely held private limited company in Kolkata, by name, M/s.Dry De Fashions Private Limited, in which three of the partners in the assessee firm are Directors. It is stated that the company also carries on business on the same line, namely, manufacturing and exporting dry flower and potpourri. The said Private Limited Company is not a 100% EOU.