9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Computation of deduction under section 80HHC for two appeals involving common points. 2. Allowance of interest on refund. 3. Treatment of indirect expenditure in computation. Issue 1: Computation of deduction under section 80HHC - The appeals involved common points related to the computation of deduction under section 80HHC for two different assesses. - The first ground in IT Appeal No. 1364/Mum./03 disputed the Ld. CIT(Appeals)'s order regarding the treatment of loss in the computation under section 80HHC(3). - The ITAT Mumbai held, based on precedents, that the loss should be ignored for the deduction under section 80HHC and the profits should be further increased by the incentive amount. - The ITAT referred to previous cases where it was established that the section should receive a liberal interpretation, and the proviso should be read independently to advance the cause. - Regarding export incentives, the ITAT directed the Assessing Officer to increase the computed profits by an amount proportionate to 90% of the export incentives. - In IT Appeal No. 1365/Mum./03, the same issue was raised, and the ITAT followed the decision made in IT Appeal No. 1364/Mum./03, directing the Assessing Officer to ignore the loss and increase the computed profit by a proportionate amount of the export incentive. Issue 2: Allowance of interest on refund - The second ground in IT Appeal No. 1364/Mum./03 was related to the allowance of interest on refund. - The ITAT considered the applicability of a Supreme Court judgment regarding interest on refund under section 214 and section 244A. - The ITAT held that the principle laid down by the Supreme Court in the judgment was not confined to section 214 and that interest on interest should be allowed in cases where the refund was delayed unjustifiably. - Consequently, the ITAT allowed interest on the amount of refund until the date of issuing the refund in the case at hand. Issue 3: Treatment of indirect expenditure in computation - In IT Appeal No. 1365/Mum./03, ground No. 2 disputed the Ld. CIT(Appeals)'s action in not deducting 10% of the incentive amount from indirect expenditure. - The ITAT considered a Special Bench decision and the contention that 10% of the incentive amount should be reduced from the indirect expenses. - Since the ITAT's decision on the first ground was in favor of the assessee, it did not render a specific decision on this ground, as it did not survive. In conclusion, the ITAT allowed the appeals partly, directing the Assessing Officer to adjust the computation of deduction under section 80HHC and allowing interest on refund while dismissing certain grounds not pressed during arguments.
|
