9911796707
TMI Blog2013 (12) TMI 535X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... parate orders of CIT(A), Amritsar, each dated 12.10.2012 relating to assessment years 2004-05 and 2009-10 respectively. As the issue involved in both the appeals is common, therefore, these were heard together and are being disposed off by this common order for the sake of convenience. 2. The common grounds raised in both the appeals by the Revenue are as under: "1 Whether on the facts and circu ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Steel and press works Ltd, wherein the Hon'ble Supreme Court had held such receipts to be the revenue receipts in as much as in that case payments were made only after the industries had been set up and payments were not made for purpose of setting up of industries. 3. Whether on the facts and circumstances whether the Ld. CIT(A), Amritsar was right in not considering the decision in the case of ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... in both the appeals is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Jurisdictional High Court of Jammu & Kashmir in the case of Shree Balaji Alloys v. CIT and Another, reported in (2011) 333 ITR 335 (J&K), where it has been held that the Excise Duty refund is to be treated as 'capital receipt' and is not liable to be taxed. 3. We have heard both the parties and perused the re ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
