9911796707
TMI Blog1998 (3) TMI 119X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ssessee raising the following common question of law arising out of the assessment years 1974-75, 1975-76 and 1976-77 : "Whether, on the facts and circumstances of the case, the customs duty of Rs. 35,659 for the first year, Rs. 75,738 for the second year, and Rs. 46,950 for the third year that were paid by the assessee-firm outside India was as an expenditure entitled to weighted deduction unde ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... of Income-tax (Appeals)/Appellate Assistant Commissioner. However, the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal in an appeal preferred by the Revenue disallowed the said deduction. The assessee has sought for reference of the abovesaid question. A detailed discussion of the law on the subject is not required inasmuch as the issue is covered by a recent pronouncement of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Stepwell ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... September 15, 1993, in the case of this very assessee reported as Faqir Chand Raghunath Dass v. CIT [1994] 206 ITR 696. The Division Bench has held: "In our opinion, the money which was spent by the assessee was clearly an expenditure incurred in relation to the distribution, supply and provision of goods outside India. The goods having been exported from India were to be sold abroad. Without i ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... t Co. [1979] 120 ITR 827. We are in complete agreement with the aforesaid decision in the case of Handicrafts and Handloom Export Corporation of India [1983] 140 ITR 532 (Delhi). Just as the assessee in that case paid customs duty in the U. S. A., in the present case, the customs duty has been paid in Japan and in Canada. The goods could not have been supplied or provided without the assessee in ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
