DCIT RG. - 3(1), Mumbai vs. M/S. Gujarat Ambuja Cements Ltd., Mumbai
In the result, appeal filed by the assessee is partly allowed and the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed
ITA 4374/MUM/2005[2001-2002]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Jan 2017AY 2001-2002
Bench: Shri C.N. Prasad, Jm & Shri Rajesh Kumar, Am Gujarat Ambuja Cements Limited, The Dy. Commissioner Of 122, Maker Chambers, Iii, Income-Tax- Range 3(1), फनधभ/ Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Vs. Mumbai-400021. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 Dy. Commissioner Of Income- Gujarat Ambuja Cements Tax-Range 3(1), Limited, 122, Maker फनधभ/ Room No.607, 6Th Floor, Chambers, Iii, Nariman Point, Aayakar Bhavan, Mumbai-400021 Vs. M K Marg, Mumbai-400020 स्थधमी रेखध सं./ Pan : Aaacg0569P (अऩीरधथी /Appellant) (प्रत्मथी / Respondent) :
For Appellant: S/Shri Soumen Adak & HarishFor Respondent: Shri K B Shukla
…O and prayed for setting aside the order of ld.CIT(A). On the other hand, the ld. AR of the assessee argued that this ground of appeal is covered in his favour by the decision of Hon‟ble Apex Court in CIT V/s Lakshmi Machine Works 35 and 4374/Mum/2005 (2007) 290 ITR 667. The Hon‟ble Apex Court held that sales tax and excise duty do not have any element of „turnover‟. Excise duty and sales tax are indirect taxes. They are recovered by the assessee on behalf of the Government. Therefore, if they are relatable to exports, the formula u/s 80HHC would become unworkable. Hence, excise duty and sales tax cannot form pa…
