DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX vs. RUBAMIN PVT. LTD.

TAXAP/1427/2005HC GujaratGJHC24034821200510 October 2014Author: HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE KS JHAVERI,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE K.J.THAKER4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

Facts

The assessee, Rubamin Pvt. Ltd., filed its income tax return for assessment year 1996-97 on November 30, 1996, declaring a total income of Rs. 33,28,720. A revised return was filed on April 21, 1997, declaring Rs. 31,43,990, and a further revised return on February 5, 1998, declaring NIL income. These returns were processed under Section 143(1)(a) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with adjustments. A notice under Section 143(2) was issued. The Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'C', in ITA No. 1350/A/2000, dismissed the appeal of the Revenue. The Revenue has appealed this decision to the High Court.

Held

The High Court dismissed the appeal filed by the Revenue. The Court referred to two Supreme Court decisions: B. Desraj vs. Commissioner of Income-tax [2008] 301 ITR 439 (SC) and Commissioner of Income-tax vs. Lakshmi Machine Works [2007] 290 ITR 667 (SC). The Court held that these decisions would enure for the benefit of the assessee as they were fully applicable to the facts of the present case. Consequently, the substantial question of law was answered against the appellant-Revenue and in favour of the assessee. No elaborate reasoning was provided by the High Court, relying on the cited precedents. The operative direction was the dismissal of the Tax Appeal.

Key Issues

1. Whether, on the facts and circumstances and in law, the ITAT was right in directing the Assessing Officer (AO) to exclude sums relatable to sales tax and excise duty from the "total turnover" for computing profits derived from export to claim benefit under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961? Assessee's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific contentions made by the assessee before the High Court. However, the ITAT's decision, which the High Court upheld, implies that sales tax and excise duty should be excluded from "total turnover" for Section 80HHC purposes. Revenue's Contention: The Revenue appealed the ITAT's order, implicitly arguing that sales tax and excise duty should be included in "total turnover" for the purpose of computing the benefit under Section 80HHC.

Sections Cited

Section 80HHC, Section 143(1)(a), Section 143(2)

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

O/TAXAP/1427/2005 JUDGMENT IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD TAX APPEAL NO. 1427 of 2005

FOR APPROVAL AND SIGNATURE:

HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI

and HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.J.THAKER

================================================================ 1 Whether Reporters of Local Papers may be allowed to see the judgment ? 2 To be referred to the Reporter or not ? 3 Whether their Lordships wish to see the fair copy of the judgment ? 4 Whether this case involves a substantial question of law as to the interpretation of the Constitution of India, 1950 or any order made thereunder ? 5 Whether it is to be circulated to the civil judge ? ================================================================ DY.COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX....Appellant(s) Versus RUBAMIN PVT. LTD.....Opponent(s) ================================================================ Appearance: MR KM PARIKH, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1 RULE SERVED for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ================================================================ CORAM: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE KS JHAVERI and HONOURABL

The order continues below.

Read the full judgment

A free account opens 10 full judgments a month. Re-reading one you have already opened does not count again.

Create a free accountSign in

See plans and prices

The summary, the parties, the sections and the citations above are open to everyone and always will be. Only the text of the order and the PDF are metered.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →