TMI Blog2011 (2) TMI 953X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... wherein after noticing the judgment of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Kalpataru Colours & Chemicals [2010 (6) TMI 63 - BOMBAY HIGH COURT] the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law - Decided against the assessee - I.T.A. No.74 of 2011 - - - Dated:- 23-2-2011 - MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. Mr. Denesh Goyal, Stand ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... represents the entire amount inclusive of premium of sale of such DEPB? (iii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT was right in law in holding that the word profit referred to in Sections 28(iiid) and 28(iiie) of the Income Tax Act, 1961 means the difference between the sale price of DEPB and the face value of DEPB ignoring the fact that the entire amount represents ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... circumstances of the case, the ITAT has failed to appreciate that deduction u/s 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 was rightly computed in accordance with amendment made by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005 with retrospective effect from 01.04.1998? 2. Learned counsel for the appellant states that the matter is covered in favour of the revenue by orders of this Court dated 16.8.2010 in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
