TMI Blog2011 (4) TMI 858X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... proceeds is taxable under section 28(iiid) - It is not permissible to bifurcate the proceeds of the DEPB into “face value” for section 80 HHC r.w.s. 28(iiid) - matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. - I.T.A. No.93 of 2011 (O&M) - - - Dated:- 27-4-2011 - MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL, JJ. Present:- Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Standing Counsel for the appellant. ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, the Act ) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in I.T.A. No.311/CHANDI/2007 dated14.5.2010 for the assessment year 2003-04 claiming follo ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ace value of DEPB/DFRC should be deducted from the sale proceed for the purpose of determination of deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961? (vi) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the ITAT is right in law in not appreciating 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? (vii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon ble Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is justified in law in not holding that 90% amount of DEPB was rightly excluded while working Profits of the I.T.A. No.93 of 2011 Business as per explanation (baa) to section 80 HHC rea ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... es and did not fulfill the conditions set out in the third proviso to sec.80HHC I.T.A. No.93 of 2011 (3), it was not entitled to deduction u/s 80HHC on the amount received on transfer of DEPB. 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 I.T.A. No.301 of 2010 CIT v. M/s Victor Forgings and I.T.A. No.299 of 2010 CIT v. F.C. Sondhi, wherein after noticing the judgment of the Bombay High Court in CIT v. Kalpataru Colours Chemicals 2010 (42) DTR 193, the matter was remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. 3. Since we find that the matter is covered by earlier orders of this Court, we dispose of this appeal in same ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
