PRAFFUL EXPORTS
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that DEPB credit is covered by Section 28(iiib) and must be considered for computing the deduction under Section 80HHC. This decision aligns with the Supreme Court's ruling in Topman Exports.
What were the facts?
The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80HHC, and the dispute arose regarding the inclusion of DEPB credit in the computation. The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal had previously ruled against its inclusion.
What were the issues?
Whether export incentives like DEPB credit should be considered for the purpose of calculating deduction under Section 80HHC, specifically in relation to Explanation (baa) and Sub-section 3.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 191/2012, ITA 192/2012, 193/2012 and 194/2012 . . . PRAFFUL EXPORTS ..... Appellant . Through: Dr.Rakesh Gupta and Ms.Rani . Kiyala, Advocates . . . versus . . . . . CIT ..... Respondent . Through: Mr.Sanjeev Rajpal, Advocate . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 17.05.2012 . . . By an order dated 23.3.2012, the following question was framed: . ?Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that export incentive in form of DEPB receipt not to be taken into under Explanation baa to section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961?? . . . We have examined the order dated 23.3.2012 and it is seen that there are clerical errors in the question framed on 23.3.2012. The same is reframed and should read as under:- . ?Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in holding that export incentive in form of DEPB credit is not to be taken into consideration for the purpose of Explanation (baa) and Sub-section 3 to Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961? . . . Having heard learned counsel for the parties, we hold that the issue is squarely covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Topman Exports v. Commissioner of Income Tax (Mumbai); (2012) 247 CTR (SC) 353. In the said decision, it has been held that DEPB credit is covered by Section 28 (iiib) of the Income Tax Act and, accordingly, deduction has to be computed while considering Explanation (baa) and Sub- section 3 to Section 80HHC. . The question of law mentioned above is, accordingly answered in . negative, i.e., in favour of the appellant-assessee and against the respondent-revenue. The assessing officer will re-compute the deduction under Section 80HHC in terms of the ratio and the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Topman Exports (Supra). . The appeal is, accordingly, disposed of. . . . . . SANJIV KHANNA, J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . MAY 17, 2012 . sv . $ 17 .
More judgments on Section 80HHC
- Sheena Industries, Panipat vs ACIT Circle, PanipatITA 3076/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: Disposed26 May 2026AY 2004-2005
- Sarla Fashion Garments, New Delhi vs JCIT, Range-31, DelhiITA 1799/DEL/2006[2001-2002]Status: Disposed20 May 2026AY 2001-2002
- M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd vs C I T and AnrITA/517/200826 Feb 2026
- C I T vs M/S Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Helathcare LtdITA/271/20095 Feb 2026
- CIT, Chandigarh vs M/S Hindustan Unilever LtdITA/677/20085 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Shining Steel Through Its Proprietor Kartik Gupta vs. Union Of INDIA & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Redamancy World Through Its Proprietor Sanjay Kumar Goel vs. Central Board Of Indirect Taxes And Customs & Ors.Delhi · 27 Oct 2026
- M/S Arj Exim INDIA vs. Additional Commissioner Of CGST, Appeals-Ii, New Delhi And OrsDelhi · 27 Oct 2026
- The State Of Bihar Through The Commissioner Of State Tax vs. Kaushlendra KumarPatna · 27 Oct 2026
- Ayush Sureshchandra Shah vs. State Of GujaratGujarat · 27 Oct 2026