2017 (5) TMI 1552 - HC - Income Tax

Deduction u/s 80IB - refund of excise duty - Held that - It was not disputed by learned counsel for the parties that in view of the order of even date passed in Nexo Industries Private Limited Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana (2017 (5) TMI 1404 - PUNJAB & HARYANA HIGH COURT) relating to claim for deduction under Section 80IB of the Act in respect of refund of excise duty where the matter has been remanded to the Assessing Officer to readjudicate after affording opportunity of hearing to the assessee, the issue in the present case relating to deduction under Section 80IB of the Act is to be sent back for fresh decision in accordance with law. Deduction under Section 80HHC - claim be declined in pursuance to retrospective amendment in the Act relatable to option to be made amongst duty draw back and DEPB after the conclusion of an event - Held that - The amendment was prospective and was invalid to the extent of being made retrospective. The Supreme Court considering the similar issue regarding constitutional validity of the provisions held the same to be prospective in nature in Commissioner of Income Tax and another vs. Avani Exports and others, (2015 (4) TMI 193 - SUPREME COURT). In the present case, the Tribunal also had declined the claim of the assessee under Section 80HHC of the Act by taking into consideration the amended provisions which have been held to be prospective - matter is referred back to the Assessing Officer for examining the matter afresh in respect of claim under Section 80HHC of the Act as well

Summary

Issues:
1. Claim of excise duty rebate/refund as export incentive under Central Excise Act.
2. Interpretation of Section 80HHC for claim after retrospective amendment.
3. Eligibility of excise duty rebate/refund claim under Section 80IB.

Analysis:
1. The appellant-assessee filed an appeal against the Tribunal's order regarding the claim of excise duty rebate/refund as an export incentive. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal, leading to the current appeal. The High Court noted that a similar issue in another case had been remanded to the Assessing Officer for fresh decision. Consequently, the High Court ordered the same for the present case, directing a fresh decision in accordance with the law.

2. Regarding the interpretation of Section 80HHC, the Assessing Officer had denied the deduction based on retrospective amendments. The High Court highlighted the amended provisions and previous court decisions on the matter. The Tribunal had also rejected the claim based on the amended provisions, which were held to be prospective by the courts. The Tribunal emphasized the lack of evidence by the assessee to justify the claim under Section 80HHC. Consequently, the High Court referred the matter back to the Assessing Officer for a fresh examination of the claim under Section 80HHC, considering the latest case law and after hearing the assessee.

3. The issue of eligibility of excise duty rebate/refund claim under Section 80IB was also raised. The High Court directed the Assessing Officer to readjudicate this issue as well, in light of the latest case law, after affording the assessee an opportunity to present their case. The High Court disposed of the appeal with instructions for the Assessing Officer to pass a detailed order in accordance with the law on both the deduction under Section 80HHC and Section 80IB.