GOYAL IMPEX and INDUSTRIES LTD vs. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX

PDF · subscribers
ITA/816/2010HC Delhi25 July 20121 pages
AI SummaryPartly Allowed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court dismissed the appeal concerning Section 263 as no substantial question of law arose. For the DEPB credit and Section 80HHC issue, the court followed a Supreme Court decision and directed the Assessing Officer to compute the deduction accordingly.

What were the facts?

The appeals concerned the admissibility of DEPB credit under Section 28(iiid) and its impact on Section 80HHC deductions. One appeal also questioned the legality of an order under Section 263.

What were the issues?

Whether DEPB credit is chargeable under Section 28(iiid) and its effect on Section 80HHC deductions. The legality of an order passed under Section 263 was also an issue.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 28(iiid),Section 80HHC,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show list

Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI . . . ITA 816/2010 . . . GOYAL IMPEX and INDUSTRIES LTD ..... Appellant . Through Mr. V N Jha, Adv. . . . versus . . . COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX ..... Respondent . Through Mr. N P Sahni, sr. standing counsel . . . ITA 207/2011 . . . CIT ..... Appellant . Through Mr. N P Sahni, sr. standing counsel . . . versus . . . GOYAL IMPEX and INDUSTRIES LTD ..... Respondent . Through Mr. V N Jha and Ms. Manasvini Bajpai, Adv. . . . CORAM: . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT . HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.V.EASWAR . . . O R D E R . 25.07.2012 . . . The question involved in this appeal is to the admissibility of the DEPB credit whether it is chargeable under Section 28(iiid) of the Income Tax in the year in which it was applied for against exports and the consequential amendment by inserting the 3rd proviso to section 80HHC. . 2. As far as the other question arising for consideration in ITA 816/2010 is concerned, i.e., the question of the legality of the order under Section 263, does not arise for consideration in view of the fact that order dated 20.3.2006 of the Tribunal had become final. This Court had granted opportunities to counsel to seek instructions to withdraw the appeal in the light of the decision in Topman Exports (supra), however no instructions are forthcoming. In view of the said position with regard to the applicability of Section 263 no question arises for consideration. Therefore there does not arise any substantial question of law. This appeal is accordingly dismissed. . . . 3. This court has been apprised of the decision of the Supreme Court in Topman Exports Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2012) 342 ITR 49 (SC). Following the said decision the Assessing Officer is directed to compute the deduction under Section 80HHC in the case of the assessee in accordance with law. The appeal ITA No.207/2011 is allowed on the above terms. . . . . . S. RAVINDRA BHAT, J . . . . . . . R.V.EASWAR, J . JULY 25, 2012 . vld . . . $ 31 . . .

More judgments on Section 28(iiid)

All 69 judgments and leading authorities on Section 28(iiid) →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →