M/S.ram Ratna International v. The Additional Commissioner Of Income Tax, Range 18(1), Mumbai

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1186 OF 2008 M/s.Ram Ratna International..Appellant. Versus The Additional Commissioner of Income Tax, Range 18(1), Mumbai ..Respondent. Mr.Ajay Singh for the appellant. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 5[th] February 2013 P.C. : 1.This appeal was admitted on 13[th] March 2009 on the following substantial questions of law. a)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, cost for acquiring the DEPB entitlement must be the value of customs duty mentioned on the DEPB instrument which should be deducted from the sale proceeds of such entitlement while computing the profit on sale of DEPB entitlement and the cost of DEPB so ascertained is to be reduced from direct / indirect cost for working deduction under Section 80HHC ?law, cost for acquiring the DEPB entitlement must be the value of customs duty mentioned on the DEPB instrument which should be deducted from the sale proceeds of such entitlement while computing the profit on sale of DEPB entitlement and the cost of DEPB so ascertained is to be reduced from direct / indirect cost for working deduction under Section 80HHC ? b)Whether DEPB being in nature of reimbursement of the cost of goods, it has to be reduced from the purchases as the exporter reduces its price considering the element of DEPB credit available goods, it has to be reduced from the purchases as the exporter reduces its price considering the element of DEPB credit available in order to meet competition in global market ? c)Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case the Tribunal ought to have excluded only the profits on sale of DEPB licences, if any, in computing the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act, which in the case of the appellant was nil, as the sale of DEPB licences had resulted in loss ?Tribunal ought to have excluded only the profits on sale of DEPB licences, if any, in computing the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act, which in the case of the appellant was nil, as the sale of DEPB licences had resulted in loss ? d)Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in excluding the sale value of DEPB for the purpose of calculating the deduction under Section 80HHC as per the amended provision by Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 2005 ?value of DEPB for the purpose of calculating the deduction under Section 80HHC as per the amended provision by Taxation Law (Amendment) Act, 2005 ? 2.By the impugned order, the Tribunal has restored the issue to the file of the assessing officer to recompute the deduction available under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (Act for short). 3.Since the issue raised in this appeal is covered by the decision of the Apex Court in the matter of Topman Exports V/s. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in (2012) 342 ITR 49 (SC), we see no reason to entertain the proposed questions of law. However, the Assessing officer is directed to recompute the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act in accordance with the decision of the Apex court in Topman Exports (supra). 4.The appeal is disposed of in above terms with no order as to costs. (M.S. Sanklecha, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)