M/s. Arvind Foot Wears Pvt. Ltd., Kanpur V. DCIT, Kanpur

ITA 363/LKW/2010

• Counselvise Citation: 36323714 RSA 2010
• Duration Of Justice: 3 year(s) 3 month(s) 3 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 27-08-2013
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Next Hearing Date: 28-04-2014
• Assessment Year: 2006-2007
• Appeal Filed On: 24-05-2010
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: P K DEY
• Keywords: Question of law
• Section: 80IB

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL LUCKNOW BENCH A , LUCKNOW BEFORE SHRI S UNIL KUMAR YADAV , JUDICIAL MEMBER AND SHRI. A. K. GARODIA , ACCOUNTANT MEMBER ITA NO S . 363, 435, 436 & 437/LKW/2010 ASSESSMENT YEAR S : 2006 - 07, 2005 - 06, 2004 - 05 & 2003 - 04 M /S ARVIND FOOTWEARS PVT. LTD. E - 56, PANKI INDUSTRIAL AREA SITE - III, KANPUR V. DY. CIT RANGE 6, KANPUR PAN: AABCP1870B (APP ELL ANT) (RESPONDENT) APP ELL ANT BY: NONE RESPONDENT BY: SHRI. P. K. DEY, D.R. DATE OF HEARING: 28.04.2014 DATE OF PRONOUNCEME NT: 2 8 .04.2014 O RDER UNDER SECTION 255 OF THE INCOME TAX ACT, 1961. PER BENCH : PURSUANT TO THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BLE ALLAHABAD HIGH COURT IN THE CASE OF CIT VS. M/S ARVIND FOOTWEAR PVT. LTD IN APPEAL NO.14 OF 2014 ANSWERING THE FOLLOWING QUESTION OF LAW IN THE NEGATIVE IN FAVOUR OF THE REVENUE, WE HOLD THAT DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE INCOME - TAX ACT, 1961 (HEREINAFTER CALLED IN SHORT THE ACT') IN RESPECT OF DUTY DRAWBACK RECEIVED IS NOT ALLOWABLE IN THE LIGHT OF THE JUDGMENT OF THE HON'BL E APEX COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA VS. CIT [2009] 317 ITR 218 (SC): - 1. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE ITAT WAS JUSTIFIED IN SETTING ASIDE THE ISSUE AND REMITTING TO THE CIT(A) FOR ADJUDICATION DE NOVO WIT HOUT APPRECIATING THE FACT PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ ) : - 2 - : THAT THE CASE IS SQUARELY COVERED BY THE DECISION OF HON'BLE SUPREME COURT IN THE CASE OF LIBERTY INDIA VS. CIT [317 ITR 218 (SC)]? 2. WHETHER ON THE FACTS AND CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE AND IN LAW THE HON'BLE ITAT WAS JUSTIFIED I N NOT FOLLOWING A BINDING PRECEDENT THAT WAS SQUARELY APPLICABLE TO THE CASE BEFORE IT? 2. WE, THEREF ORE, MODIFY OUR ORDER DATED 27.8 .2013 AND HOLD THAT THE ASSESSEE IS NOT ENTITLED FOR DEDUCTION UNDER SECTION 80IB OF THE ACT ON DUTY DRAWBACK. ACCORDINGLY THE APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE STAND DISMISSED. 3. IN THE RESULT, APPEALS OF THE ASSESSEE ARE DISMISSED. ORDER PRONOUNCED IN THE OPEN COURT ON 28.4.2014. SD/ - SD/ - [ A. K. GARODIA ] [ S UNIL KUMAR Y ADAV ] ACCOUNTANT MEMBER JUDICIAL MEMBER DATED: 2 8 TH AP RIL, 2014 JJ: 2804 COPY FORWARDED TO: 1 . APPELLANT 2 . RESPONDENT 3 . CIT(A) 4 . CIT 5 . DR ASSISTANT REGISTRAR PRINT TO PDF WITHOUT THIS MESSAGE BY PURCHASING NOVAPDF ( HTTP://WWW.NOVAPDF.COM/ )