PRINCE PIPE & FITTINGS P. LTD,MUMBAI vs. DCIT RG 7(1), MUMBAI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 7559/MUM/2013Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai09 December 2015AY 2005-062 pages

In favour of the Revenue: the assessee's appeal was dismissed. From the AI summary of this appeal.

AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The assessee's counsel, in view of the Supreme Court's decision in Liberty India, stated that the appeal was not pressed. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal as not pressed.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed deduction under Section 80IB for duty drawback receipts. The AO and CIT(A) denied this deduction, relying on the Supreme Court judgment in Liberty India.

What were the issues?

The primary issue was the allowability of deduction under Section 80IB on duty drawback receipts in light of the Supreme Court's ruling.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IB

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.

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, “C” BENCH, MUMBAI

Before: SHRI D. KARUNAKARA RAO & SHRI AMARJIT SINGH

For Appellant: Ms. Mrugakshi Joshi
Hearing: 09.12.2015Pronounced: 09.12.2015

PER D. KARUNAKARA RAO, AM: This appeal filed by the assessee on 24.12.2013 is against the order of the CIT (A)-13, Mumbai dated 28.11.2013 for the assessment year 2005-2006. 2. The only issues raised in this appeal relates to the allowability of deduction u/s 80IB of the Act in respect of duty drawback receipts amounting to Rs. 18,83,594/-. AO and the CIT (A) denied the benefit of deduction on such receipts received on account of duty drawback scheme. For this proposition, the AO and the CIT (A) relied on the judgment of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of M/s. Liberty India vs. CIT [317 ITR 218] (SC) and many other precedents in their support. Aggrieved with the above, assessee is in appeal before the Tribunal.

3.

During the proceedings before us, at the outset, Ld Counsel for the assessee submitted that in view of the above cited Apex Court judgment in the case of Liberty India (supra), the appeal filed by the assessee is not pressed. Accordingly, after hearing Ld Representatives of both the parties, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee as not pressed. Accordingly, the solitary ground raised by the assessee is dismissed as not pressed.

4.

In the result, appeal of the assessee is dismissed. Order pronounced in the open court on 9th December, 2015. (AMARJIT SINGH) ACCOUNTANT MEMBER भुंफई Mumbai; ददनांक 9/12/2015 व.नन.स./ OKK , Sr. PS आदेश की प्रतिलऱपि अग्रेपिि/Copy of the Order forwarded to : अऩीराथी / The Appellant 1. 2. प्रत्मथी / The Respondent. आमकय आमुक्त(अऩीर) / The CIT(A)- 3. आमकय आमुक्त / CIT 4. ववबागीम प्रनतननधध, आमकय अऩीरीम अधधकयण, भुंफई / DR,

5.

ITAT, Mumbai गार्ड पाईर / Guard file. 6. सत्मावऩत प्रनत ////

आदेशानुसार/ BY ORDER, उि/सहायक िंजीकार (Dy./Asstt.

More judgments on Section 80IB

All 1,094 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IB →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →