Case Laws
Acts
Notifications
Circulars
Classification
Forms
Manuals
Articles
News
D. Forum
Highlights
Notes
🚨 Important Update for Our Users
We are transitioning to our new and improved portal - www.taxtmi.com - for a better experience.
⚠️ This portal will be discontinued on 31-07-2025
If you encounter any issues or problems while using the new portal,
please
let us know via our feedback form
so we can address them promptly.
Home
2015 (3) TMI 842 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80HHC on counter sales - whether ITAT as well as the CIT(A) was justified in allowing the deduction u/s 80 HHC when there is no finding to the effect that the goods were cleared at any of the custom station? - Held that - Apex Court in CIT vs. Silver & Arts Palace 2002 (12) TMI 12 - SUPREME Court has held that the counter sale to the foreign tourists against convertible foreign exchange in India is eligible for deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. The Apex Court has also approved the decision of the Allahabad High Court in the case of Ram Babu & sons vs. Union of India 1996 (5) TMI 61 - ALLAHABAD High Court . In the present case the assessee had produced the Sale To Foreign Tourists Voucher which not only recorded the name and address of the customer (tourist) but also his/her passport number and the declaration given by him that the goods will not be gifted or sold in India. The goods sold at counter at the shop/emporium were sold to be taken out of the country which necessarily involved clearance of baggage by the customs authorites. There was no further proof nor any document in proof of clearance of the goods at the Customs Station by the assessee is required. The declaration in the form of Sale To Foreign Tourist Voucher for sale made against the convertible foreign exchange with the undertaking that the goods will not be gifted or sold in India was sufficient proof for export out of India. Unless anything contrary was alleged and proved by the department it was not necessary for the assessee to have produced the documents of clearance of goods sold by him to the foreign tourists at any Customs Station. The Explanation (aa) is not a rule of evidence nor raises any presumption. It also does not require any proof of clearance at any Customs Station. The explanation is couched in double negative. It is a rule of exclusion and excludes only those transactions which do not involve clearance at any Customs Station. It cannot be read in a manner as suggested by learned counsel appearing for the department that a proof of customs clearance of baggage must be provided to establish the export of goods out of India for the purpose of deduction of profits on such sales under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. - Decided in favour of assessee.
|