TaxTMI Login
Just a moment...
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
When case Id is present, search is done only for this
of 
of 
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of of 
All Case Laws
of of All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of <h1>Court upholds export deduction denial, citing correct facts. Circular doesn't impact eligibility. Each party bears own costs.</h1> <h3>CIT. Udaipur Versus M/s. Jyoti Minerals Pvt. Ltd.</h3> CIT. Udaipur Versus M/s. Jyoti Minerals Pvt. Ltd. - TMI Issues:1. Substantial question of law regarding disallowance of deduction under Section 80HHC on export of marble blocks.2. Legal effect of Circular No. 693 dated 17.11.1994 on the deduction under Section 80HHC.Issue 1:The High Court admitted the appeal based on the substantial question of law concerning the disallowance of deduction under Section 80HHC on export of marble blocks. The appellant questioned the Tribunal's decision to uphold the CIT(A)'s order deleting the addition, arguing that there was no substantial value addition as per Circular No. 693 dated 17.11.1994. However, the counsel for the appellant acknowledged that a similar appeal had been dismissed previously by the Court, and the present case was identical to the earlier judgment. The Court referred to a previous case involving Arihant Tiles & Minerals, where it was held that the assessee was eligible for the deduction under Section 80HHC for exporting cut and polished marble blocks. The Court upheld the Tribunal's decision, stating that the findings of facts by the Tribunal were correct and not disputed by the Revenue. Consequently, the Court dismissed the appeal in favor of the assessee.Issue 2:Regarding the legal effect of Circular No. 693 dated 17.11.1994, the Court held that the circular did not adversely affect the claims of the assessee for deduction under Section 80HHC. The Court emphasized that the assessee was entitled to the benefit of the deduction despite the existence of the circular. Citing the case Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Arihant Tiles & Minerals, the Court dismissed the Revenue's appeals, affirming that the circular did not impact the assessee's eligibility for the deduction. The Court answered the substantial question of law against the Revenue and in favor of the assessee, ultimately dismissing the appeal and directing each party to bear their own costs.This detailed analysis of the judgment provides insights into the Court's reasoning and conclusions on the issues raised, emphasizing the legal interpretation and application of relevant provisions and precedents in reaching the final decision.
TaxTMI 