HOME TEX 77, SECT 29 PANIPAT vs. CIT KARNAL

ITA/476/2009HC Punjab & HaryanaPHHC01084587200904 December 2009Author: MR. JUSTICE M.S. SULLAR,MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL2 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal was not sustainable as no substantial question of law arose from the impugned order. This was based on the assessee's counsel's fair concession that all the substantial questions of law raised in the appeal had already been decided against the assessee by the High Court in Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax, which was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court of India. Therefore, the High Court dismissed the appeal. The specific findings on each of the five issues are not detailed as the appeal was disposed of on concession, but the principle established by the cited Supreme Court judgment would govern these issues, implying that Duty Drawback and Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme receipts are not eligible for deduction under Section 80IB, and the interpretation of Section 147 and the restriction of deductions under Section 80HHC were decided against the assessee. The issue of the ex-parte order was implicitly addressed by the concession on the merits.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Home Tex, filed an appeal before the Punjab and Haryana High Court against an order dated March 28, 2008, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Delhi Bench. The appeal pertains to the Assessment Year 2002-2003. The ITAT's order was challenged on several substantial questions of law. The assessee's counsel conceded that these questions had already been decided against the assessee by the High Court in the case of Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax, which was subsequently affirmed by the Supreme Court of India.

What were the issues?

The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial questions of law: 1. Whether the Tribunal's order was sustainable as it was ex-parte, violating the principles of natural justice regarding the opportunity of being heard? 2. Whether Duty Drawback received is an amount derived and eligible for deduction under Section 80IB? 3. Whether the Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme received is an amount derived and eligible for deduction under Section 80IB? 4. Whether the Tribunal erred in restricting the claim of deductions under Section 80HHC read with Sections 80IA(9) and 80IB(13)? 5. Whether the initiation of proceedings under Section 147, based on the judgment in CIT v. Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 (SC), was covered within the meaning of "reasons to believe"? Assessee's Contentions: The assessee raised these questions of law. The revenue's contentions are not recorded as the assessee's counsel conceded the issues. Authorities/Precedents Relied On: The assessee's counsel conceded that the issues were decided against the assessee in Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2007) 293 ITR 520 (P&H High Court) and Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 317 Income Tax Reports 218 (SC).

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 260-A,Section 80IB,Section 80HHC,Section 80IA,Section 147

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

I.T.A.No.476 of 2009 2 IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.

Income Tax Appeal No.476 of 2009 Date of Decision:- 4.12.2009 Home Tex,77,Sector 29, HUDA, Panipat ---Appellant

Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal

---Respondent

CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present:- Mr.Devinder Kumar, Advocate for the appellant. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL) The assessee has filed the instant appeal under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 28.3.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (hereinafter referred to as “the ITAT”) in ITA No.948/Del/2007, in the case of assessee for the Assessment Year 2002-2003, raising the following substantial questions of law:- I. Whether the Tribunal order is sustainable being exparte which is against t

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.

More judgments on Section 260-A

All 2,570 judgments and leading authorities on Section 260-A →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →