Itxa/1076/2008 Of M/S S.k. Silks, Mumbai v. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax 14 (3), Mumbai And Anr

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1076 OF 2008 M/s. S.K. Silks….AppellantV/s.The Asstt. Commissioner ofIncome-tax 14(3)….Respondent Dr. Daniel I/by. Mr. V.S. Hadade, Advocate for the appellant. Coram : M.S. Sanklecha, & Sandeep K. Shinde, JJ.Tuesday, 14th August, 2018. P.C. : 1. This Appeal under Section 260 of the Income-TaxAct, 1961 (the Act) was admitted on 22[nd] September, 2008on numerous substantial questions of law. 2. Dr. Daniel, Learned Counsel appearing for theappellant, on instructions, states that the appellant nowseeks to urge only the following substantial question of lawfor our consideration : “i). On the facts and in the circumstancesof the case, whether the Income-tax AppellateTribunal was right in law in confirming the CIT(A)'s order and thereby denying the benefit of80HHC deduction in respect of profit realizedon the transfer of EPB entitlement passbook 3. This Appeal relates to Assessment Year 2003-04. At the time of admission, the respondents had waivedservice. However, none appears for the Revenue today. 4. We find that the substantial question standsconcluded against the Revenue and in favour of theappellant-assessee by the decision of the Supreme Court inM/s. Topman Exports Versus. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai, (2012) 342 ITR 49. Dr. Daniel, states thatthe appellant herein was a party to the appeals listed beforethe Apex Court in Topman Exports (supra) relating toAssessment Year 2004-05 on identical question. 5. In the above view, substantial question of law isanswered in the negative i.e. in favour of the appellant andagainst the Revenue. 6. Appeal allowed in terms of the decision of theApex Court in M/s. Topman Exports (supra). (SANDEEP K. SHINDE, J)(M.S. SANKLECHA, J) Digitally signedNeetaby NeetaShaileshShailesh SawantDate:Sawant2018.08.1616:25:08 +0530