9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (1) TMI 579X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... o. 261 of 2008. 2. ITA No. 261 of 2008 has been filed by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (in short "the Act") against the order dated 13.4.2007 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "E", New Delhi (hereinafter referred to as "the Tribunal") in ITA No. 993(Del)/2006 for the assessment year 2004-05, claiming the following substantial questions of law:- i. Whether the DEPB income is eligible as a deduction u/s 80HHC being an export incentive granted for promotion of export? ii. Whether the Taxation Amendment Act, 2005 introduced with effect from 1.4.1998 can be used to deny a benefit accruing to the assessee on account of incentives earlier granted and whether the amendment would be hit by th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... iled an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) [for brevity "the CIT(A)"]. The CIT(A) vide order dated 19.1.2006 (Annexure A-2) upheld the order of the Assessing Officer and dismissed the appeal. The CIT(A) denied the FDR interest to the assessee holding that the same has been settled by the jurisdictional High Court in favour of the revenue in the case of Rani Paliwal v. CIT (2004) 268 ITR 220. Still dissatisfied, the assessee filed an appeal before the Tribunal, who vide impugned order dated 13.4.2007 remanded the issue relating to eligibility of deduction of DEPB income under Section 80HHC of the Act in view of the amendment to Section 28 of the Act with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998. The Tribunal also upheld the vie ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... gorically held that deduction was admissible only where the profits were derived from industrial undertaking. In other words, it was that the profits should have resulted from industrial activity carried on by the assessee. 7. Further, a Division Bench of this Court in Sneh Lata Jain v. Income Tax Officer, Ward No. II, Ambala and another, ITA No. 615 of 2006 decided on 27.9.2007 to which one of us (Ajay Kumar Mittal, J) was a member, where Fixed Deposit Receipts were used as security or collateral security to obtain various loans from the banks in the form of car loan, machinery loan, miscellaneous loan etc., it was held that it could not be construed to have direct nexus with the profits and gains of the industrial undertaking derived fro ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
