9911796707
TMI Blog2010 (11) TMI 776X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of law for determination by this court : "Whether the right to receive IPRS accrued on the date of export, i.e., March 22, 1993, in the year relevant to the assessment year 1993-94 ?" 3. The facts necessary for adjudication, as narrated in the appeal are that the assessee filed its return for the assessment year 1993-94, declaring net income at Rs. nil. The assessee claimed unabsorbed investment allowances of Rs. 50,454 and Rs. 37,971 for the past assessment years 1989-90 and 1990-91 respectively. The return was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Assessment was framed, vide order dated March 30, 1994, at an income of Rs. 5,46,412 and, while doing so, the Assessing Officer made the following additions : (i) ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... -94. Counsel for the Revenue argued that the IPRS accrued on the date of export, i.e., March 22, 1993, and therefore, the same was exigible to income-tax relating to the assessment year 1993-94. 8. We are unable to accept the aforesaid submission of the Revenue. The issue regarding accrual of income from export incentive came up for con-sideration before this court in I. T. C. No. 184 of 1994 decided on October 11, 2010 (CIT v. Sriyansh Knitters P. Ltd. [2011] 336 ITR 235 (P&H)) wherein it was held that no income accrued till the claim of the assessee was quantified and verified. Admittedly, in the present case, the assessee had submitted the claim for IPRS and received it during the next assessment year, i.e., the assessment year 1 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... bursement of IPRS was being made at a fixed percentage of the exports. Thus the very nature of the scheme is such which requires scrutiny and exami-nation by the Government for determination of the price difference. Until and unless the claim is submitted to the Government and is scrutinized and approved by the Government it cannot be said that the assessee has acquired the right to receive such income. Moreover, the exports were made at the fag end of the accounting year, i.e., about 8 days before the close of the accounting year. Therefore, it does not appear that the assessee delayed submission of its claim for IPRS with an intention to defer its income to the next assessment year. Therefore, the amount which was neither quantified nor a ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nutilised amount of import licence, was determined at a fixed rate. This is not the case here. The assessee is not entitled to IPRS at a fixed percentage of the exports value of goods. It was still to be examined and determined by the Government. Therefore, the ratio the judgment of the Bombay High Court is also not applicable to the facts of the present case. Having regard to the facts and circum-stances of the case, we are of the considered opinion that the order of the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) does not merit any interference. Accordingly, the same is upheld and this ground of appeal is dismissed." 9. No perversity or illegality could be pointed out in the aforesaid finding, which may warrant interference by this court ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
