TMI Blog2022 (10) TMI 938X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee. Therefore, we are not inclined to interfere with the order passed by the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the revenue. - I.T.A.No.163/Viz/2022 - - - Dated:- 20-10-2022 - Shri Duvvuru Rl Reddy, Hon ble Judicial Member And Shri S Balakrishnan, Hon ble Accountant Member For the Appellant : Shri Pavan Chakrapani, AR For the Respondent : Shri M.N.Murthy Naik, CIT(DR) ORDER PER SHRI DUVVURU RL REDDY, JUDICIAL MEMBER : This appeal is filed by the revenue against the order of the Commissioner of Income Tax [in short, [CIT(A)], Visakhapatnam-3 in DIN Order No.ITBA/APL/S/250/2022-23/1043819177(1) dated 12.07.2022 for the Assessment Year (A.Y.) 2017-18. 2. Brief facts of the case are that the assessee i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ins from business or profession as per clause (iib) and (iid) to section 28 of the Income Tax Act, 1961. In the meantime, following the directions of the Ld.Pr.CIT, the AO passed order u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 of the Act dated 31.05.2021, disallowing an amount of Rs.17,13,09,032/- with regard to duty draw back and sale of licenses. On being aggrieved, the assessee preferred an appeal before the CIT(A) against the order passed u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 dated 31.05.2021. The Ld.CIT(A) has allowed the appeal of the assessee filed against the consequential order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s.263 and passed an order dated 12.07.2022 in favour of the assessee, relying on the decision of the ITAT (supra). 3. On being aggrieved, the revenue prefer ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... he directions of the Ld.Pr.CIT and wrongly allowed the appeal of the assessee, relying on the decision of the Tribunal. Therefore, the Ld.DR pleaded for sustaining the findings of the Ld.Pr.CIT, consequential order passed by the AO u/s 143(3) r.w.s. 263 and allow the appeal of the revenue. 4. Per contra, the Ld.AR submitted that the Tribunal has rightly quashed the order of the Ld.Pr.CIT and allowed the appeal in favour of the assessee. The Ld.AR further submitted that in view of the decision of the Tribunal, the consequential order passed by the AO has no locus standi. Considering the same, the Ld.CIT(A) has rightly allowed the appeal of the assessee.. Hence, pleaded for upholding the order of the Ld.CIT(A) and dismiss the appeal of the ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India vs. CIT (supra) and directed the AO to exclude the export incentives for the purpose of computation of deduction U/s. 80IB(11A) of the Act. As the export incentives cannot be considered as profits derived from industrial activities for the purpose of claiming deduction U/s. 80IB(11A) of the Act, the reliance placed by the Ld. AR in the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Meghalaya Steels Ltd (supra) have merits in the case. Relevant paras 28 29 of Meghalaya Steels Ltd (supra) judgment delivered by the Hon ble Supreme Court is extracted below for reference: 28. It only remains to consider one further argument by Shri Radhakrishnan. He has argued that as the subs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ave correctly construed Sections 80- IB and 80-IC. The Himachal Pradesh High Court, having wrongly interpreted the judgments in Sterling Foods and Liberty India to arrive at the opposite conclusion, is held to be wrongly decided for the reasons given by us hereinabove. 10. Therefore, in view of the subsequent decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Meghalaya Steel Ltd (supra), the findings recorded by the authorities below based on the decision of the Hon ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India (supra) cannot be held as sustainable as the Hon ble Supreme Court in para 29 of its decision in Meghalaya Steel Ltd (supra) held that the Hon ble Himachal Pradesh High Court having wrongly interpreted the judgment in the ca ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
