9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (1) TMI 1235X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sessee that it is only a capital receipt. 2. Ld. Counsel for the assessee, at the outset, submits that identical issue came up for adjudication before the Tribunal in assessee's own case for the AY 2005-06 and 2006-07 and the Tribunal held that the excise duty refund received by the assessee is in the nature of capital receipt and not chargeable to tax. A copy of the order is placed on record. 3. Heard rival submissions, perused the orders of the authorities below and the order of the Tribunal for assessment years 2005-06 and 2006-07 in ITA No.3437/Del/2014, 3848/Del/2014 and 3934/Del/2014 dated 24.09.2024. The Tribunal after taking note of the Notification No.39/2001 Central Excise dated 31.07.2001 issued by Central Government in the wak ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and thereafter claim refund of the said amount from the department. e) The exemption shall apply for a period not exceeding 5 years from the date of commencement of commercial production by the unit. f) The date of setting up of the new industrial unit was extended from 31.7.2003 to 31.7.2004 vide Notification No. 45/2002 dated 2.9.2002 and thereafter, vide Notification No. 9/2004 dated 21.1.2004 and vide Notification No. 55/2004 dated 9.11.2004, the last date of setting up of the new unit was further extended to 31.12.2004 and 31.12.2005 respectively. 4.2. The assessee in the year 2003 had set up pipe coating unit namely, Anti Corrosion and Concrete Weight Coating at Mundra, Gujarat. Thereafter, in the year 2005, the assessee also se ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ground, there was nothing wrong in the action of the Id. CIT(A) admitting the said additional ground, even though the same was offered to tax by the assessee voluntarily in the return of income. It is trite law that there is no estoppel against the statute. Reliance in this regard is placed on the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Taparia Tools Ltd vs JCIT reported in 372 ITR 605 (SC). Hence the objection raised by the revenue before us in this regard is hereby dismissed. 4.5. The Incentive scheme 2001 for Economic Development of Kutch District dated 9.11.2001 issued by Government of Gujarat is enclosed in Pages 71 to 81 of the Paper Book. The Central Excise Notification No/. 39/2001 dated 31.7.2001 is enclosed in Pages ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... al development with the larger public interest of rehabilitating the people and economic activity in the affected region. In fact in the said decision, the petitioners had challenged the validity of the subsequent notifications issued in the year 2008 substantially diluting excise incentives granted by the original notification issued in the year 2001 in the form of excise duty refund. Hence the Hon'ble Gujarat High Court was required to examine whether the subsequent notifications issued by the Government in the year 2008 were legally valid or not. The Hon'ble Gujarat High Court after going through the incentive scheme 2001 observed that exemption from excise duty was granted by the original notification in the year 2001 in order t ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
