Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2015 (11) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2015 (11) TMI 1071 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80HHC(4C) - whether insurance claim was not in the nature of 'other receipts' and 90% of such receipts could not be reduced from 'profit of business' under clause (baa) of Explanation below section 80HHC(4C) of I.T. Act? - Held that:- Question No. (i) is covered by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax-I, Ludhiana v. Venus Fabrics, Ludhiana (2013 (7) TMI 927 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT) wherein it was held the words “any other receipt of a similar nature included in such profits” used in the explanation have to be read “edjusdem generis” to the preceding words, i.e., “brokerage”, “commission”, “rent”, “charges”. The words “similar nature” used before the words “any other receipt” refers to and alludes to the principle of “edjusdem generis” and in fact leaves no ambiguity as to legislative intent that only such receipts would fall within the meaning of sub-clause (1) of the explanation as would partake the nature of the words preceding the expression “receipts of a similar nature”. A claim for insurance arises on account of a special loss to an assessee and, therefore, does not require any degree of legal acumen or scholarship to infer that such receipt cannot be included within subclause (1) of the aforementioned explanation. - Decided against the revenue Deduction u/s 80HHC - Held that:- The sales tax & CST were not includible in total turnover for computing deduction u/s 80HHC of I.T. Act, when the sales tax & CST were realized as a part of sale proceeds of the goods manufactured by the Respondent - This question is covered by the decisions of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Lakshmi Machine Works (2007 (4) TMI 202 - SUPREME Court) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Vardhman Polytex Ltd. (2006 (5) TMI 82 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA High Court) wherein it was held that the amount of sales tax and excise duty for the purposes of computation of deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act are to be excluded from the total turnover. - Decided against the revenue Deduction u/s 80IB on duty drawn back - Held that:- As revenue has relied upon the judgment of the Apex Court in Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009 (8) TMI 63 - SUPREME COURT) to urge that profit from DEPB and Duty Drawback Scheme are not profits derived from the eligible business under Section 80IB of the Act. It was prayed that question thus, to be answered in favour of the revenue. Learned counsel for the assessee was unable to controvert that the similar issue was adjudicated by the Apex Court in Liberty India's case (supra) in favour of the revenue. - Decided against the assessee.
|