TMI Blog2012 (12) TMI 368X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ct of earlier assessment years is also nothing to do with the ratio of the decision in case IPCA Laboratories (2004 (3) TMI 9 - SUPREME COURT). Therefore, CIT u/s 263 in directing the AO to allow deduction u/s 80HHC in accordance with law. Issue decides in favour of revenue - I.T.A. No. 1804/Mds/2010 - - - Dated:- 26-7-2012 - Shri N.S. Saini Shri Challa Nagendra Prasad, JJ. Appellant by : Shri V.S. Jayakumar, Advocate Respondent by : Ms. Anupama Shukla, CIT ORDER PER Challa Nagendra Prasad, Judicial Member This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, Chennai-I, Chennai passed under section 263 of the Income Tax Act dated 23.03.2010 for the assessment year ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ons of the amendment made by the taxation laws (Amendment Act, 2005). 5. The CIT failed to notice that the two decisions relied on by him does not put the assessee in a worst position as they are not applicable to the facts of the appellant's case. 6. The CIT failed to note that the assessment completed under section 143(3) read with section 147 cannot be revised under section 263 in the manner done by him. 7. The appellant craves leave to adduce additional grounds of appeal at the time of hearing. 4. Facts of the case are that the assessee filed return of income for the assessment year 2003-04 on 30.03.2003 admitting NIL income. The return was processed under section 143(1) on 07.02.2004. Later, a notice under section 148 was is ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ion 263 of the Act directing the Assessing Officer to modify the assessment order suitably to allow credit/relief under section 80HHC as per the ratio of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratories Ltd. vs. DCIT [266 ITR 521]. Against this order of the Commissioner of Income Tax, the assessee is in appeal before us. 6. The counsel for the assessee submits that retrospective amendment was made to section 80HHC by Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 2005 with effect from 01.04.1998, whereby the export turnover of Rs..10.00 crores was arbitrarily fixed to confer certain benefit under section 80HHC viz, the DEPB profits, cash incentives and other sums. The deduction is allowed in full in the hands of the assessee whos ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ction under section 80HHC without setting off of carry forward loss of the earlier assessment years. Since the order passed by the Assessing Officer is against the ratio of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratories vs. DCIT, judgment dated March 11, 2004 reported in 266 ITR 521, the Commissioner of Income Tax directed the Assessing Officer to recompute the relief allowable under section 80HHC suitably in view of the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratories vs. DCIT (supra). The contention of the assessee is that the Hon ble Madras High Court granted an ad-interim stay, therefore, the deduction allowed under section 80HHC by the Assessing Officer cannot be reworked appears to be ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
