In M/S. Prayas Writing Instruments v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax-24(3, the High Court (2013) dismissed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: PC: In this appeal following questions of law have been raised for our consideration. a) Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that the receipts on account of duty draw back Rs.11,45,2028/- are not eligible profit for the purposes of Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961? b) Whether t...
Decision: 3)Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
ASN
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1415 OF 2011
M/s. Prayas Writing Instruments.
...Appellant.
v.
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax-24(3)....Respondent.
Mr. K.Gopal with Mr. Jitendra Singh for the Appellant.None for the Respondent.
CORAM : J.P. DEVADHAR AND
M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.
DATE : 08TH FEBRUARY, 2013.
PC:
In this appeal following questions of law have been
raised for our consideration.
a)
Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in holding that
the receipts on account of duty draw back Rs.11,45,2028/- are not eligible profit for the purposes of Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961?
b)
Whether the Tribunal is correct in law in denying the
claim of deduction u/s. 80IB of the Act on duty draw backs which reduce the input costs and increase the profitability of the undertaking?
2)Counsel for the appellant fairly states that the questions raised in this appeal are covered against the assessee by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2009) 317 ITR 218 (S.C.). Further, in another appeal filed by the same respondent assessee being Income Tax Appeal No.487 of 2011 this Court refused to entertain the proposed questions of law. Therefore, we do not entertain question (a)and (b) as proposed.
3)Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed with costs.
(M.S.SANKLECHA, J.)
(J.P. DEVADHAR, 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.