GPVERDHAN PRASAD SINGHAL, Jaipur V. ACIT, Jaipur

ITA 183/JPR/2016

• Counselvise Citation: [2016] 131 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 5058 (ITAT-JAIPUR)
• Duration Of Justice: 7 month(s) 6 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 07-10-2016
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Dismissed
• Bench Allotted: Not Allotted
• Assessment Year: 2010-2011
• Appeal Filed On: 01-03-2016
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: R A VERMA CIT DHK
• Section: 80IB; 2

Judgement Text

VK;DJ VIHYH; VF/KDJ.K] T;IQJ U;K;IHB] T;IQJ IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHE S, JAIPUR JH HKKXPUN] YS[KK LNL; ,OA JH DQY HKKJR] U;KF;D LNL; DS LE{K BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM VK;DJ VIHY LA-@ ITA NO. 183/JP/2016 FU/KZKJ.K O'K Z@ ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2010-11. GOVERDHAN PRASAD SINGHAL, CC-229, GOLE MARKET, JAWAHAR NAGAR, JAIPUR. CUKE VS. THE ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME - TAX, CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR. LFKK;H YS[KK LA-@THVKBZVKJ LA-@ PAN NO. ACVPS 0236 P VIHYKFKHZ@ APPELLANT IZR;FKHZ@ RESPONDENT FU/KZKFJRH DH VKSJ LS@ ASSESSEE BY : NONE JKTLO DH VKSJ LS@ REVENUE BY : SHRI R.A. VERMA (ADDL. CIT) LQUOKBZ DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF HEARING : 27.09.2016. ?KKS'K .KK DH RKJH[K@ DATE OF PRONOUNCEMENT : 07/10/2016. VKNS'K@ ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. THIS APPEAL BY THE ASSESSEE IS DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A)-5, JAIPUR DATED 18.01.2016 PERTAINING TO A.Y. 2010-11. THE SOLITARY GROUND RAISED BY THE ASSESSEE READS AS UNDER :- THAT ON THE FACTS AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CA SE, THE LD. CIT (APPEALS)-5 JAIPUR IS WRONG, UNJUST AND ERRED IN LA W FOR UPHOLDING THE ACTION OF A.O. OF REDUCING THE DEPB & DUTY DRAW BAC K AMOUNTING TO RS. 43,04,175/- FROM THE PROFIT & GAINS ELIGIBLE FO R DEDUCTION U/S 80IB. 2. NO ONE APPEARED ON BEHALF OF THE ASSESSEE. ON T HE LAST DATE OF HEARING ALSO NO ONE APPEARED. THE ISSUE INVOLVED IN THIS APPEAL IS WITH REGARD TO ALLOWABILITY OF DEPB & DUTY DRAW BACK AMOUNTING TO RS. 43,04,175/- FROM THE PROFIT & GAINS FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB. 2 ITA NO. 183/JP/2016 GOVERDHAN PRASAD SINGHAL 3. AT THE OUTSET, THE LD. D/R SUBMITTED THE ISSUE I S NOT RES INTEGRA. THE ISSUE IS DECIDED BY THE HONBLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA LTD VS. CIT, 317 ITR 218. 4. WE HAVE HEARD LD. D/R. THE LD. CIT (A) HAS DECI DED THIS ISSUE IN PARA 2.3 AND 2.4 OF HIS ORDER BY OBSERVING AS UNDER :- 2.3. I HAVE CONSIDERED THE FACTS OF THE CASE, THE ASSESSMENT ORDER AND THE SUBMISSIONS OF THE APPELLANT. THE APPELLANT HAS CLAIMED DEDUCTION U/S 80IB FROM AY 2010-11 INSTEAD OF DEDUC TION CLAIMED U/S 10BA UPTO AY 2009-10 SINCE THE TENURE OF THE LATTER DEDUCTION GOT STATUTORILY CONCLUDED W.E.F. 01.04.2010. THE AO HAS HELD THAT U/S 80IB DEDUCTION IS ALLOWED ON PROFIT AND GAINS DERIVED FR OM THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS AND DEPB BENEFITS AND DUTY DRAW BACK ARE N OT PART OF PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED FROM THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS AND AR E HENCE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB. THE ISSUE AS TO WHETHER DUT Y DRAWBACK AND DEPB BENEFITS ARE PART OF PROFITS DERIVED FROM THE ELIGIBLE BUSINESS AND ARE HENCE ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB HAS ATTAI NED FINALITY WITH THE ORDER OF THE APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDI A VS. CIT (2009), 317 ITR 218, WHEREIN IT HAS BEEN HELD THAT DUTY DRAWBAC K AS WELL AS DEPB BENEFITS ARE NOT PART OF PROFIT DERIVED FROM THE EL IGIBLE BUSINESS AND ARE HENCE NOT ELIGIBLE FOR DEDUCTION U/S 80IB. THER EFORE, THE APPELLANT IS NOT ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION OF THE AMOUNT OF DUTY DRAWBACK AND DEPB BENEFITS. 2.4. THE ALTERNATE SUB MISSION OF THE APPELLANT IS THAT WHILE CONSIDERING DEDUCTION U/S 10BA IN APPELLANTS OWN C ASE FOR AY 2007- 08, HONBLE ITAT, JAIPUR BENCH, HAS HELD THAT THE D EDUCTION U/S 10BA WILL BE COMPUTED AFTER INCLUDING DUTY DRAWBACK AND DEPB PROFITS IN THE PROFIT OF THE BUSINESS AS WELL AS THE TOTAL TUR NOVER. HENCE THE APPELLANT HAS ARGUED THAT SIMILARLY FOR COMPUTING D EDUCT ION U/S 80I B FOR THE YEAR UNDER CONSIDERATION, DUTY DRAWBACK AND DEPB PROFITS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED PART OF THE PROFIT ELIGIBLE FO R DEDUCTION. HOWEVER, I DO NOT FIND MERIT IN THE SAID ALTERNATE SUBMISSI ON, SINCE THE ISSUE AS TO WHETHER DEPB BENEFITS AND DUTY DRAWBACK ARE PART OF PROFIT FOR THE PURPOSE OF SECTION 80IB, HAS ALREADY ATTAINED FINAL ITY WITH THE DECISION OF APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA (SUPRA). FURTHER, THE SCHEMES OF DEDUCTION UNDER S. 80IB DIFFER FROM THAT U/S 10BA SINCE THE LATTER HAS THE CONCEPT OF PROFIT OF THE BUSINESS, W HICH IS COMPUTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH A SPECIFIC FORMULA, WHEREAS DEDUCTI ON U/S 80IB IS AVAILABLE ON THE PROFITS AND GAINS DERIVED FROM THE ELIGIBLE UNDERTAKING. THE WORDINGS USED IN THE SAID TWO SECTIONS DIFFER A ND, AS A RESULT, THE 3 ITA NO. 183/JP/2016 GOVERDHAN PRASAD SINGHAL MEANING AND METHOD OF CALCULATION DIFFER. THUS THE MEANING AND METHOD OF COMPUTATION OF DEDUCTION U/S 10BA CANNOT BE IMPORTED INTO S. 80IB. THE WORDINGS DERIVED FROM USED IN S . 80IB ARE MORE RESTRICTED IN THEIR MEANING AND WOULD NOT INCLUDE I NCOME OF THE NATURE OF DEPB PROFITS AND DUTY DRAWBACK UNDER ITS AMBIT A S HELD BY THE APEX COURT (SUPRA). ACCORDINGLY, THE DENIAL OF DEDU CTION U/S 80IB ON THE AMOUNTS OF DEPB PROFITS AND DUTY DRAWBACK, IS C ONFIRMED. THIS GROUND OF APPEAL IS DISMISSED. WE, THEREFORE, DO NOT SEE ANY REASON TO INTERFERE I N THE ORDER OF LD. CIT (A) AS THE ISSUE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE JUDGMENT OF HONBL E APEX COURT RENDERED IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA LTD. VS. CIT (SUPRA). HENCE T HE GROUND OF ASSESSEE IS DISMISSED. 5. IN THE RESULT, APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS DISMISS ED. ORDER IS PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 07/10/ 2016. SD/- SD/- ( HKKXPUN ( DQY HKKJR ) ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) YS[KK LNL;@ ACCOUNTANT MEMBER U;KF;D LNL;@ JUDICIAL MEMBER JAIPUR DATED:- 07/10/2016. DAS/ VKNS'K DH IZFRFYFI VXZSF'KR@ COPY OF THE ORDER FORWARDED TO: 1. THE APPELLANT- SHRI GOVERDHAN PRASAD SINGHAL, J AIPUR. 2. THE RESPONDENT THE ACIT CIRCLE-6, JAIPUR. 3. THE CIT(A). 4. THE CIT, 5. THE DR, ITAT, JAIPUR 6. GUARD FILE (ITA NO. 183/JP/2016) VKNS'KKUQLKJ@ BY ORDER, LGK;D IATHDKJ@ ASSISTANT. REGISTRAR 4 ITA NO. 183/JP/2016 GOVERDHAN PRASAD SINGHAL