9911796707
TMI Blog2014 (8) TMI 524X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... 80IC. The AO noticed that this sum included an amount of Rs. 13,98,31,925/- as duty draw back towards export incentives. The AO examined the allowability of deduction u/s 80IC of export incentive with reference to various decisions including the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India Vs. CIT 317 ITR 218 and concluded that in view of this decision, the assessee was not entitled for deduction u/s 80IC on export incentive. The AO, inter alia, pointed out that source of investment is not the eligible business of the undertaking but the scheme of Government of India. He observed that export incentives can, at the most, be held to be attributable to eligible business as there is commercial connection between them but coul ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... s liable to be taxed during this year: Duty draw back received Rs. 7,29,34,000/- Duty draw back receivable Rs. 6,68,97,925/- Rs. 13,98,31,925 3.1. Ld. Counsel further submitted that in coming to his conclusion ld. CIT(A) relied on the decisions in the cases of : - Liberty India Vs. CIT 317 ITR 218 (SC); - CIT Vs. Raja Bahadur Kamakshya Narayan Singh 16 ITR 375 (PC); - Mrs. Bacha F. Guzdar Vs. CIT 27 ITR 1 (SC); - Sterling Foods 237 ITR 53 (SC) - Pandian Chemicals Ltd. 262 ITR 278. 3.2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee pointed out that in any view of the matter, the amount of duty draw back received only could be considered for disallowing deduction u/s 80IC and not the entire amount. 3.3. Ld. Counsel submitted that on disallowance of de ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... facie furnishes some clue as to the meaning and purpose of the section". Therefore, section 80IC stands on altogether different footing as compared to section 80IV. 3.4. Ld. Counsel in brief has given the following distinguishing features between section 80IC and 80IB:- 3.5. Ld. Counsel further submitted that duty draw back is nothing but the return of duties like sales-tax and excise paid at the time of buying of raw material but was refundable to the assessee if good were exported. The submission is that since in the year of purchase the profits got reduced because of payment of duties like sales-tax and excise, therefore, when the same is refunded to assessee in the form of duty draw back then it cannot be considered de hors the asses ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ly new. He pointed out that this new plea cannot be raised in view of the decision in the case of Chevalier I Iyyappan AIR 1966 SC 1017. 4.2. Ld. CIT(DR) further pointed out that present appeal is for A.Y. 2008- 09 which was pending when the appeal for A.Y. 2009-10 was decided though assessee wrongly stated in its synopsis that the appeal was pending before the ld. CIT(A). 5. We have considered rival submissions and have perused the record of the case. We find that the issue is covered by the order of the ITAT in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2009-10, against which appeal is also pending before Hon'ble Uttrakhand High Court. Therefore, we respectfully follow the decision of the ITAT in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2009-10, wherein it has b ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
