COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX DELHI I vs. ASAHI INDIA GLASS LTD.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . 16.012.2010 . Present: Ms. P.L. Bansal, Adv. for the Revenue. None for the assessee. . . . +ITA No.522/2009 . Nobody appears on behalf of the assessee even on second call. We may point out that the matter came up for hearing yesterday, i.e., 15.012.2010. Learned counsel for the appellant/Revenue had made a submission that the questions of law proposed in this appeal are covered by two judgments, viz., one by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [317 ITR 218] and other by the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s Great Eastern Exports?Vs.?The Commissioner of Income Tax in ITA No.267 of 2008 (decided on 29.011.2010). Learned counsel for the respondent assessee had sought some time to look into the aforesaid aspect. However, as aforesaid, counsel for the respondent has not appeared today. In these circumstances, we proceed with the matter in the absence of learned counsel for the respondent/assessee. The following substantial questions arise for consideration: ?a) Whether the ITAT was correct in law in allowing deduction under Section 80IA of the Act to the assessee on the amount of `74,33,234 being export incentives received by the assessee by way of advance license in respect of exports made from Laminated Glass Unit-I? . b) Whether export incentive received by the assessee can be said to be the income derived from the business of industrial undertaking or it is attributable to the business of industrial undertaking? . c) Whether ITAT was correct in law in allowing netting off of interest paid by the assessee against interest received from subsidiary company and thereby allowing deduction under Section 80IA and 80HHC of the Act to the assessee on the amount of interest received? . d) Whether ITAT was correct in law in directing the Assessing Officer not to reduce amount of profit allowed to the assessee as deduction under Section 80IA of the Act from the profits of the business while computing deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act?? . Question (a) is covered by the judgment of the Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [317 ITR 218] in favour of the Revenue and Question (c) is covered against the Revenue by the same judgment as AO attributed it to the business activity. Question (b) and (d) are covered by the judgment of this Court in the case of M/s Great Eastern Exports?Vs.?The Commissioner of Income Tax in ITA No.267 of 2008 (decided on 29.011.2010 in favour of the Revenue Therefore, the Questions (a), (b) and (d) are decided in favour of the Revenue and Question (c) is decided in favour of the assessee. This appeal is allowed partly. . A.K. SIKRI, J. . SURESH KAIT, J. DECEMBER 16, 2010 pmc . . #54