Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2017 (5) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (5) TMI 1492 - HC - Income TaxDeduction under Section 80IC(2)(a)(iii) on excise duty refund - refund of excise duty is not an income derived from industrial undertaking - Held that:- The basic object of establishing factory in north-east part of the country is a Hercules task and is established only with a public motive of taking benefits of taxation, therefore the establishment of a factory in north-east parts with all hurdles is required to be viewed in right prospective and the object of the government is to promote industries in the backward area of north-east area. When with all difficulties, the assessee has established a factory in the north-east part of the country, the taxes which are paid is required to be considered under the taxation statute and whenever there are two views it is well settled that the views which are in favour of the assessee is required to be adopted. No doubt issue is now squarely covered by the decision of Delhi High Court in CIT vs. Dharampal Prem Chand Ltd. (2008 (11) TMI 231 - DELHI HIGH COURT) whereby the Delhi High Court has considered the rebate of excise duty. In that view of the matter, in our considered opinion, the view taken by the Delhi High Court is to be accepted by this Court and we accept the same. No doubt the counsel for the department has contended that the two views are taken by the Gujarat High Court while considering the duty draw back but this will not fall within the duty as held by the tribunal and in view of judgment of Supreme Court in Meghalaya Steel (2016 (3) TMI 375 - SUPREME COURT). - Decided in favour of the assessee and against the department. Rejection of books of accounts under Section 145 (3) - Held that:- Questions regarding 145 (3) in our considered opinion when the assessee was required to maintain all books of accounts for excise duty, the rejection of books of accounts under Section 145(3) followed only on the ground of 99 % sale made to the sister concerned. Merely because this is made to the sister concerned is not a ground of rejection of books of accounts under Section 145 (3). Decided in favour of the assessee. Whether the payment is made duty tax and it is reflected in the books of accounts, what is the profit and loss is absolutely prerogative of the assessee - Held that:- In view of the observations made by the Supreme Court in S.A. Builder’s [2006 (12) TMI 82 - SUPREME COURT], the A.O. has to step into the shoes of assessee and has to assess. It is for the assessee to assess on what ground he has to adjust to the market condition. In that view of the matter even in second appeal all issues are answered in favour of the assessee.
|