Commissioner Of Income Taxthrough:through v. M/S J.b. Exports Ltd.through:none
High Court
20 Jul 2017 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
Commissioner Of Income Taxthrough:through v. M/S J.b. Exports Ltd.through:none
Date of order
20 Jul 2017
Assessment year(s)
—
Outcome
Other
The order — as passed by the High Court
Case summary
In Commissioner Of Income Taxthrough:through v. M/S J.b. Exports Ltd.through:none, the High Court (2017) decided the matter.
Decision: The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
$~R64
*IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ITA 369/2005
COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAXThrough:Through:
..... AppellantMr. Asheesh Jain, Senior StandingCounsel for Revenue with Mr.Vikrant A. Maheshwari, Advocate.
versus
M/S J.B. EXPORTS LTD.Through:None.
..... Respondent
CORAM:JUSTICE S.MURALIDHARJUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
%
O R D E R20.07.2017
1. This appeal by the Revenue is directed against the order dated 6[th]October,2004 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA No.577/Del/1997 for the Assessment Year (‘AY’) 1992-93.
2. While admitting the appeal on 13[th]September, 2005, the following twoquestions of law were framed for determination :-
a) Whether the ITAT was correct in law inallowing deduction under Section 80 HHC to theassessee on the amount of interest from FDRswithout applying the provisions of Explanation(baa) to Section 80 HHC of the Act?allowing deduction under Section 80 HHC to theassessee on the amount of interest from FDRswithout applying the provisions of Explanation(baa) to Section 80 HHC of the Act?
b) Whether the amount of Rs.73,69,376/- being theduty draw back can be regarded as income derivedfrom an industrial undertaking so as to entitle theassessee a deduction under Section 80-I of theIncome Tax Act?”
3. As far as Question (a) above is concerned, the same stands answered infavour of the Assessee and against the Revenue by the decision of this Courtin Commissioner of Income Tax v. Shri Ram Honda Power Equip, (2007)289 ITR 475 (Del). Accordingly, the Question (a) is answered in theaffirmative i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue.
4. As far as Question (b) above is concerned, it stands covered in favour ofthe Revenue by the decision of this Court in Commissioner of Income Taxv. Ritesh Industries Ltd. (2005) 274 ITR 324 (Del). This question is,accordingly, answered in negative i.e. in favour of the Revenue and againstthe Assessee.
5. The appeal stands disposed of accordingly.
S.MURALIDHAR, J
JULY 20, 2017j
PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.