AMBER EXPORTS (INDIA), MUMBAI V. ACIT 20(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6869/MUM/2008

• Counselvise Citation: [2010] 136 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 2032 (ITAT-MUMBAI)
• Duration Of Justice: 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
• Appeal Type: Income Tax Appeal
• Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2010
• Appeal Filed By: Assessee
• Order Result: Allowed
• Bench Allotted: A
• Assessment Year: 2001-2002
• Appeal Filed On: 02-12-2008
• Result in Favour of: Assessee
• Court: TRIBUNAL
• Department Lawyers: VIKRAM GAUR
• Section: 80HHC

Judgement Text

IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A, MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO, JUDICIAL MEMBER. I.T.A. 6869 /MUM/2008. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02. M/S AMBER EXPORT (INDIA), ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF NEELKANTH COMM. CENTRE, VS. INCOME TAX, 20(1), GRFLOOR, 122/123, SAHAR ROAD, MUMBAI. PARSIWADA, ANDHERI (E), MUMBAI 400 099. PAN AAEFA5935G APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI VIJAY MEHTA. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIKRAM GAUR. O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY, A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-XX, MUMBAI DATED 18-09-2 008 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHICH IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN AFFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN DEPB OF RS.6 9,65,465/- AND DFRC OF RS.43,31,657/- WERE NOT CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S 80HHC OF THE ACT. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-WORK DEDUCTION U/S 80HHC OF THE ACT BY REDUCING 10% OF INCENTIVE AS COST OF EARNING SUCH I NCENTIVE. 2 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED DEDUCTION U/S 80HHC OF THE ACT AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVE LEAVES TO ADD, AMEND, ALTER OR DELETE ALL OR ANY OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. WE HAVE HEARD MR. VIJAY MEHTA, LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND MR. VIKRAM GAUR, THE LEARNED DR. 3. AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACTS AND C IRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE, A PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW, WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE SPEC IAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF TOPMAN EXPORTS VS. ITO REPO RTED IN (2009) 318 ITR (AT) 87 (MUM) (S.B.). RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING TH E SAME, WE ALLOW GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND SET A SIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN LINE WITH THE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH (SUPRA). 4. GROUND NO. 1, 4 AND 5 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND REQUIRE NO ADJUDICATION. 5. IN THE RESULT, THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF MAY, 2010. SD/- SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. MUMBAI, DATED : 21 ST MAY, 2010. WAKODE 3 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR, A-BENCH. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR, ITAT, MUMBAI BENCHES, MUMBAI.