TMI Blog1991 (1) TMI 212X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ioner under s. 263 of IT Act. The Commissioner examined the records of the assessee-company and came to the conclusion that the additional Deduction under s. 80HHC(1)(b) of the IT Act was wrongly allowed by the Assessing Officer to the assessee. The Commissioner was, therefore, of the view that the order of Assessing Officer was erroneous in so far as it was prejudicial to the interest of Revenue. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... at the order passed by the ITO was in accordance with law and as per the provisions of s. 80HHC(1)(b) of IT Act, the assessee was entitled to the additional Deduction on the incremental turnover of exports. He further urges that the CIT was not justified in holding that for entitling the appellant to claim additional Deduction under s. 80HHC(1)(b) on account of the incremental export turnover, the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... unal. Madras Bench 'C' in the case of N.B. Nbdul Gafoor vs. ITO (1989) 29 ITD 277 (Mad). 4. On the other hand, the learned Departmental Representative draws our attention to the order of the Commr. In which it has been observed on page 2 of his order as follows: "It may be seen from the above that though the words used are "such goods" in both the limbs of cl.(b) of sub-s. (1), the repetition ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... own that the assessee should export the same goods to get the deduction on the incremental turnover. The words "such goods" do not mean that the assessee has to export the same goods. In this regard we are supported by the decision of the Tribunal reported in N.B. Abdul Gafoor. In the said decision, it has been held as follows: "With regard to the claim for deduction on the increased turnover, a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Officer had rightly allowed the additional deduction under s. 80HHC(1)(b) of the Act. The order of the ITO, therefore, was not erroneous is so far as it was prejudicial to the interests of Revenue and, therefore, the Commr. was not justified to invoke the provisions of s. 263 of IT Act. We, therefore, cancel the order of the Commr. under s. 263 of IT Act. 6. In the result, the assessee's appeal ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
