GUALA CLOSURES (INDIA) PVT. LTD.,PANAJI vs. THE ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CIRCLE-1 (1), PANAJI., PANAJI

PDF · subscribers
ITA 55/PAN/2017Status: DisposedITAT Panaji20 September 2023AY 2003-04Bench: SHRI R.S. SYAL (Vice President), SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI (Judicial Member)3 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 CIT(A) was justified in not allowing 100% of certified export profits as this claim was not part of the original assessment order. The tribunal found no infirmity in the CIT(A)'s order.

What were the facts?

The assessee claimed 50% of certified export profits in its original assessment, which was accepted. A subsequent revision by the CIT was quashed, restoring the original assessment. The assessee then sought 100% of certified export profits before the CIT(A).

What were the issues?

Whether the assessee was entitled to 100% of certified export profits when only 50% was claimed and accepted in the original assessment.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 143(3),Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, PANAJI

Before: SHRI R.S. SYAL & SHRI S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI

For Appellant: Shri A Remedios
For Respondent: Shri P.S. Shivshankar

आदेश / ORDER

PER S.S. VISWANETHRA RAVI, JM :

1.

This appeal by the assessee against the order dated 23-11-2016 passed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals)-1, Panaji [‘CIT(A)’] for assessment year 2003-04.

2.

The assessee raised three grounds of appeal amongst which the only issue emanates for our consideration is as to whether the CIT(A) justified in not accepting the contention of the assessee in granting 100% of certified export profits in the facts and circumstances of the case.

3. We note that the assessee filed return of income declaring a total income of Rs.18,39,13,318/- on 30-11-2009 which was accepted under assessment passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act, wherein, the claim of the assessee seeking 50% of certified export profits were allowed. The said assessment was quashed by the CIT u/s. 263 of the Act, which in turn the ITAT quashed the order of CIT passed u/s. 263 of the Act. Therefore, the original assessment made by the AO u/s. 143(3) of the Act was restored and the claim of assessee at 50% of certified export profits remained as such. The assessee has agitated the claim of 100% of certified export profits before the CIT(A). The CIT(A) considering the ITAT order, wherein, the original order of AO was restored, denied the claim of assessee in allowing 100% certified export profits. On perusal of the impugned order, we find no force in the arguments of ld. AR in seeking 100% certified export profits as there was no such claim in the original assessment order passed u/s. 143(3) of the Act which is evident from para 6.3 of the impugned order, therefore, we find no infirmity in the order of CIT(A) and the grounds raised by the assessee fails and are dismissed.

4.

In the result, the appeal of assessee is dismissed.

Order pronounced in the open court on 20th September, 2023.

More judgments on Section 263

All 13,616 judgments and leading authorities on Section 263 →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →