Prime Leather V. Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar

ITA/532/2009

AI Insights

M/s Prime Leather, engaged in the manufacture and sale of leather products, appealed against the ITAT's decision which disallowed their claim for deduction under Section 80-IB of the Income Tax Act for export incentives received amounting to Rs. 38,23,143. The Assessing Authority initially disallowed the deduction, a decision partially overturned by the CIT (Appeals), but ultimately upheld by the ITAT. The High Court dismissed the appeal, referencing the precedent set in M/s Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, which had similar facts and circumstances.

• Counselvise Citation: [2009] 140 COUNSELVISE.COM (IT) 815946 (HC-CHANDIGARH)
• Appeal Type: Others
• Pronouncement Date: 10-12-2009
• Assessment Year: misc
• Other Referred Cases: M/s Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (2007) 293 ITR 520, Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (2009) 317 ITR 218
• Laws Referred To: Income Tax Act, 1961
• Result in Favour of: Revenue
• Court: HIGH COURT
• Assessee Lawyers: AKSHAY BHAN
• Keywords: Deduction; Eligible profits; Export Incentives; Income tax appellate tribunal; Substantial questions of law
• Section: 143(3); 143(1)(a); 80-IB; 260-A

Judgement Text

"IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No. 532 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION : 10.12.2009 M/s Prime Leather, Jalandhar .... APPELLANT Versus Commissioner of Income Tax, Jalandhar ..... RESPONDENT CORAM :- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR Present: Mr. Akshay Bhan, Advocate, for the appellant-assessee. * * * SATISH KUMAR MITTAL , J. The assessee has filed this appeal under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), against the order dated 16.3.2009, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Amritsar Bench, Amritsar (hereinafter referred to as `the ITAT') in ITA No. 18 (Asr)/ 2009, pertaining to the assessment year 2004-05, raising the following substantial questions of law :- (i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the export incentives of Rs. 38,23,143/- were not eligible profits for the purpose of deduction under Section 80-IB of the Act? ITA No. 532 of 2009 -2- In the present case, the assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of leather products. For the assessment year 2004-05, the assessee firm filed its return of income declaring an income of Rs.12,90,376/-. The return was processed under section 143 (1) (a) of the Act. Thereafter, the case was taken up for scrutiny and processed under section 143 (3) of the Act. The Assessing Authority disallowed the deduction claimed by the assessee under section 80-IB of the Act, while holding that the receipt of export incentives of Rs. 38,23,143/- was not eligible profit for the purpose of deduction under Section 80-IB of the Act. Feeling aggrieved, the assessee filed an appeal before the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals), Jalandhar [hereinafter referred to as `the CIT (A)], who vide his order dated 29.10.2008 partly allowed the appeal. Against the aforesaid order, the assessee firm filed an appeal, which has been dismissed by the learned ITAT vide its order dated 16.3.2009. Against the said order, the instant appeal has been filed by the assessee raising the aforesaid substantial questions of law. During the course of hearing, learned counsel for the appellant- assessee could not controvert the fact that in the similar facts and circumstances, the aforesaid question of law has already been decided by this Court in favour of the revenue in the case of M/s Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (2007) 293 ITR 520, which has been relied upon by the learned ITAT in the aforesaid impugned order. The said decision has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court in Liberty India ITA No. 532 of 2009 -3- v. Commissioner of Income-Tax, (2009) 317 ITR 218. In view of the aforesaid factual and legal position, we are of the opinion that no substantial question of law is arising from the order of the ITAT. Thus, the instant appeal stands dismissed. ( SATISH KUMAR MITTAL ) JUDGE December 10, 2009 ( MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR ) ndj JUDGE "