ASIAN EXIM INTERNATIONAL V. CIT, JALANDHAR

ITA/469/2010

AI Insights

The case involves multiple income tax appeals, including Income-tax Appeal No.469 of 2010, which were heard together due to the common questions of law involved. The primary legal questions pertained to the interpretation of Sections 80HHC, 80IA(9), and 80IB(13) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, concerning the eligibility for deductions under these sections. The tribunal's decision to restrict the claim of deduction to the assessee was challenged. The High Court of Punjab and Haryana examined the precedents and statutory provisions and concluded that the deductions claimed were not permissible if a deduction under Section 80-I had already been allowed.

• Counselvise Citation: [2011] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 764877 (HC-MISC)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 18-04-2011
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: Friends Castings (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Olam Exports (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Great Eastern Exports Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & another
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Department Lawyers: RAJESH KATOCH; VIVEK SETHI
• Assessee Lawyers: PANKAJ JAIN
• Keywords: Assessment Year; Deduction; Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme; Income Tax; Interest
• Section: 80HHC; 260A; 80IA(9); 80IB(13)

Judgement Text

"Income-tax Appeal No.469 of 2010 -1- *** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Income-tax Appeal No.469 of 2010 Date of decision: 18.4.2011 Asin Exim International ...Appellant Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar, Punjab ...Respondent and other connected appeals being ITAs No. 496, 497, 498 of 2007, 638, 639 of 2008, 394, 395, 471 of 2009,53, 470 and 481 of 2010. CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate for the assessee. Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Senior Standing Counsel. Mr. Vivek Sethi, Senior Standing Counsel. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. 1. Since the Registry has not been able to send the files of ITAs No.496, 497, 498 of 2007, 638, 639 of 2008, 394, 395, 471 of 2009, 53 and 481 of 2010 on account of fire in the Court premises, learned counsel for the assessee has furnished photocopies of paper books, which are taken on record. 2. This order will dispose of ITAs No.496, 497, 498 of 2007, 638, 639 of 2008, 394, 395, 471 of 2009,53, 469, 470 and 481 of 2010 as learned counsel for the assessee appearing in all the cases has stated that questions of law involved in all these appeals are common. Income-tax Appeal No.469 of 2010 -2- *** 3. ITA No.469 of 2010 has been preferred by the assessee under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 30.10.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar in ITA No.131(ASR)/2009, for the assessment year 2004-05, raising following substantial questions of law:- “i) Whether on the true and correct interpretation of the provisions of section 80HHC r.w. section 80IA(9) r.w. section 80IB(13) the Tribunal has erred in restricting the claim of deduction to the assessee? ii) Whether the Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme and interest received is an amount derived and eligible for claim u/s 80IB?” 4. It is not disputed that the above questions were considered by this Court in Friends Castings (P) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2011) 50 DTR Judgments 61 and after considering the scheme of the relevant provisions, it was held that Section 80-IA(9) barred claim for deduction under any other provision of the Chapter VI-A if deduction under Section 80-I has been allowed. It is further stated that the same view has been taken by the Kerala High Court in Olam Exports (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2010) 34 DTR Judgments 133 and Delhi High Court in Great Eastern Exports Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax (2011) 49 DTR Judgments 33. Learned counsel for the Income-tax Appeal No.469 of 2010 -3- *** assessee further submits that a different view has been taken by the Bombay High Court in Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income Tax & another (2011) 50 DTR Judgments 65. 5. We have perused the judgment of Bombay High Court. We are not able to persuade ourselves to take a different view from the view which we have already taken in Friends Castings (P) Ltd. and also express our respectful agreement with the view expressed by Kerala High Court in Olam Exports (India) Ltd. and Delhi High Court in Great Eastern Exports. 6. In view of above, appeals filed by the assessee have to be dismissed and appeals filed by the revenue have to be allowed. Ordered accordingly. 7. A photocopy of this order be placed on the file of the each connected cases. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge April 18, 2011 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge "