Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + AT Income Tax - 2017 (2) TMI AT This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2017 (2) TMI 598 - AT - Income TaxExclusion of excise duty and sales tax from total turnover while computing deduction u/s. 80HHC after insertion of section 145A - Held that:- Identical issue was considered n the case of Dyntex Dyechem Ltd. [2014 (3) TMI 468 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] wherein held that the learned Tribunal has not committed any error in holding that the components of sales tax and central excise do not form part of sale proceeds for the purpose of Section 80HHC of the Act despite insertion of Section 145A of the Act. - Decided in favour of the assessee Deduction wrongly computed u/s. 80HHC on profits and turnover of company as a whole and not unit wise - Held that:- As decided in M/s. Meghmani Organics Ltd. Versus Asstt. Commissioner of Income-tax [ 2010 (3) TMI 1149 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] deduction under section 80HHC is to be allowed on unite-wise basis, this ground of Revenue is dismissed. Adjustment of trading exports loss against manufacturing profit while computing deduction u/s. 80HHC - Held that:- This issue is squarely covered in favour of the revenue and against the assessee by the decision of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. [2004 (3) TMI 9 - SUPREME Court] wherein held that arriving at the profits earned from export of both self manufactured goods and trading goods, the profits and losses in both the trades are required to be taken into consideration - If after such adjustments there is a positive profit the assessee would be entitled to deduction under section 80HHC(1) Denial of granting deduction u/s. 80HHC on DEPB income ignoring that rules of duty draw back does not prescribe any allocation towards custom duty in its products - Held that:- As decided in Associated Dyestuff Pvt. Ltd., Ahmedabad Versus The ACIT Circle-1 Ahmedabad [2015 (7) TMI 724 - ITAT AHMEDABAD] in view of the judgement of Avani Exports [2015 (4) TMI 193 - SUPREME COURT ] has categorically ruled that having seen the twin conditions and since 80HHC benefit is not available after 1.4.05, the cases of exporters having a turnover below and those above 10 crores should be treated similarly, we are of the considered view that the ld.CIT(A) was not justified in confirming the action of the AO. Therefore, we hereby direct the AO to allow the deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act. - Decided in favour of assessee. Gross interest income as against net interest for computing deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act - Held that:- This issue is no more res integra as the same has been decided in favour of the assessee and against the revenue by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of ACG Associated Capsules Pvt. Ltd. in [2012 (2) TMI 101 - SUPREME COURT OF INDIA ] wherein held Ninety per cent of not the gross interest/rent but only the net interest/rent, which has been included in the profits of the business of the assessee as computed under the heads ‘PGBP’ is to be deducted under clause (1) of Explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC for determining the profits of the business. Matter remanded back to A.O. to work out the deductions – Decided in favor of assessee Addition of accrued bonus under Keymen Insurance Policy - Held that:- A.O. found that the assessee has subscribed to Keymen Insurance Scheme of LIC and is paying annual premium on the same. The A.O. noticed that the assessee has not shown the bonus accrued under the scheme. Drawing support from the provisions of Section 28(vi) of the Act, the A.O. was of the firm belief that bonus of such policy will be taxable as profit and gains of business. The A.O. accordingly made an addition. As assessee could not bring any judicial decision in favour of the assessee nor could point out any fallacy/error in the factual findings of the A.O. considering the bonus accrued on the Keymen Insurance Policy in the light of the provisions of Section 28(vi) of the Act, we do not find any error or infirmity in the findings of the ld. CIT(A). - Decided against assessee
|