9911796707
TMI Blog2025 (4) TMI 1366X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... r Yadav, AOR Mr. Raghvendra Shukla, Adv. Mrs. Sunita Sharma, Adv. Mrs. Alka Agarwal, Adv. Mrs. Rekha Pandey, Adv. Mr. Shyam Gopal, Adv. Mr. Akshay Amritanshu, Adv. For the Respondent(s) : Mr. S. Ganesh, Sr. Adv. Ms. Kavita Jha, Sr. Adv. Mr. Vaibhav Kulkarni, Adv. Mr. Aniket Deepak Agrawal, AOR Ms. Aabgina Chisti, Adv. Mr. Aditeya Bali, Adv. Mr. Akash Shukla, Adv. Mr. M. P. Vinod, AOR. ORDER PER Civil Appeal No. 11919/2018 [2017 (12) TMI 536 - DELHI HIGH COURT] Learned counsel appearing for the appellant on instructions of learned Additional Solicitor General fairly states that only question nos. (iv), (vi) and (vii) framed by the High Court survive for consideration. After having heard learned counsel appearing for the parties, we ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... the Tribunal held thus: "50. In view of the above discussion, it is held that no amount of duty drawback can be said to accrue to the assessee until such claim is accepted by the concerned authorities. Therefore, conclusion of CIT(A) that duty drawback accrued to the assessee immediately on the event of export made by assessee cannot be upheld. However, there is no evidence on record to verify this factual aspect whether the claim of assessee was accepted by the concerned authorities. Therefore, the order of CIT (A) is set aside on this aspect of the issue and the matter is restored to the file of AO for verification as to when the claim of assessee was accepted. If the AO finds that claim of assessee was not accepted in the year under ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... der consideration. While passing order of remand as noted above, the ITAT observed that if the claim of assessee was not accepted in the year under consideration, then no addition shall be made. However, if it is found that the claim of assessee was accepted in the year under consideration to that extent, addition would be retained. There was no reason for the High Court to interfere with the order of remand as it was passed only for the purposes of limited factual verification by the Assessing Officer. Accordingly, the appeal is partly allowed. The impugned judgment and order of the High Court is interfered with only as regards the finding recorded by the High Court on question no.(iv) in paragraph nos.7 and 8. Consequently, the order o ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... sed today separately in Civil Appeal No. 11919 of 2018. Question No. 1 reads thus: "1. Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that Rs.24,92,33,446/- on account of duty drawback had not accrued and become payable to the assessee and cannot be included in the Taxable income of the assessee for the Assessment Year 1999-2000?" In judgment of the Tribunal in ITA No.250 of 2005 which was the subject matter of Civil Appeal No. 11919 of 2018, there was an order of remand only for limited purposes of deciding whether the prayer made by the assessee of duty drawback was allowed during the relevant year. In view of what is held in the said appeal, we direct that for the limited purposes as done in ITA No.250 of 2005, there will be a remand to th ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
