Feedback   New User   Login      
Tax Management India. Com TMI - Tax Management India. Com
Acts / Rules Notifications Circulars Tariff/ ITC HSN Forms Case Laws Manuals Short Notes Articles SMS News Highlights
        Home        
Extracts
Home List
← Previous Next →

M/s Shiv Shakti Rice Mills, Taraori, Karnal Versus Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal Range, Karnal

2016 (1) TMI 579 - PUNJAB AND HARYANA HIGH COURT

DEPB income - whether eligible as a deduction u/s 80HHC being an export incentive granted for promotion of export? - Whether the Taxation Amendment Act, 2005 introduced with effect from 1.4.1998 can be used to deny a benefit accruing to the assessee on account of incentives earlier granted and whether the amendment would be hit by the principle of Promissory estoppel? - Held that:- The Tribunal held that as per clause (iiid) and (iiie) of Section 28 of the Act, any profit on transfer of DEPB sch .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

the deduction under Section 80HHC as amended by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998. Since, the matter has been remitted back to the Assessing Officer for recomputation, therefore, question Nos. do not survive for consideration. - Exclusion of FDR interest from the business income under section 80HHC - Held that:- Tribunal had concluded that interest on Fixed Deposits had accrued on the fixed deposits pledged with FCI and also with the Sales Tax Depart .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

Y KUMAR MITTAL, J. 1. This order shall dispose of a bunch of six appeals bearing ITA Nos. 261 to 266 of 2008 as according to learned counsel for the appellant, similar questions of law are involved in all the appeals. For brevity, the facts are being extracted from ITA No. 261 of 2008. 2. ITA No. 261 of 2008 has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short the Act ) against the order dated 13.4.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench E .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

be hit by the principle of Promissory estoppel? iii. Whether the exclusion of FDR interest from the business income under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act is justified particularly in the light of the fact that the issue is to be finally decided by the Supreme Court of India? 3. Put shortly, the facts necessary for adjudication of the present appeal as narrated therein are that the assessee is engaged in the business of rice shelling and derives income from export of rice as well as sale in .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

0HHC of the Act. Further, it was held that the Duty Entitlement Pass Book (DEPB) income of ₹ 10,95,440/- was not eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act in view of the judgment of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Ritesh Industries (192 CTR 81) which held that the DEPB is not an income derived from industrial undertaking. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer vide assessment order dated 22.3.2005 (Annexure A-1) assessed the income of the assessee at ₹ 17,76,120/-. Feeling agg .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

unal, who vide impugned order dated 13.4.2007 remanded the issue relating to eligibility of deduction of DEPB income under Section 80HHC of the Act in view of the amendment to Section 28 of the Act with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998. The Tribunal also upheld the view of the CIT(A) that the FDR interest could not be taken into consideration for allowing deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act. Hence, the present appeal. 4. We have heard learned counsel for the appellant-assessee. 5. Questio .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

e (iiid) and (iiie) of Section 28 of the Act, the same proportion as the export turnover bears to the total turnover. Accordingly, the Assessing Officer was directed to re-compute the deduction under Section 80HHC as amended by Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998. Since, the matter has been remitted back to the Assessing Officer for recomputation, therefore, question Nos. (i) and (ii) do not survive for consideration. 6. Adverting to question No.(iii), it .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

er, a Division Bench of this Court in Sneh Lata Jain v. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. II, Ambala and another, ITA No. 615 of 2006 decided on 27.9.2007 to which one of us (Ajay Kumar Mittal, J) was a member, where Fixed Deposit Receipts were used as security or collateral security to obtain various loans from the banks in the form of car loan, machinery loan, miscellaneous loan etc., it was held that it could not be construed to have direct nexus with the profits and gains of the industrial undert .....

X X X X X X X

Extract - Part text only
Click here to Access Full Contents

X X X X X X X

 

 

 

 

 

Discussion Forum
what is new what is new
 


Share:            

|| Home || About us || Feedback || Contact us || Disclaimer || Terms of Use || Privacy Policy || TMI Database || Members ||

© Taxmanagementindia.com [A unit of MS Knowledge Processing Pvt. Ltd.] All rights reserved.

Go to Mobile Version