Just a moment...

Top
Help
×

By creating an account you can:

Logo TaxTMI
>
Call Us / Help / Feedback

Contact Us At :

E-mail: [email protected]

Call / WhatsApp at: +91 99117 96707

For more information, Check Contact Us

FAQs :

To know Frequently Asked Questions, Check FAQs

Most Asked Video Tutorials :

For more tutorials, Check Video Tutorials

Submit Feedback/Suggestion :

Email :
Please provide your email address so we can follow up on your feedback.
Category :
Description :
Min 15 characters0/2000
Make Most of Text Search
  1. Checkout this video tutorial: How to search effectively on TaxTMI.
  2. Put words in double quotes for exact word search, eg: "income tax"
  3. Avoid noise words such as : 'and, of, the, a'
  4. Sort by Relevance to get the most relevant document.
  5. Press Enter to add multiple terms/multiple phrases, and then click on Search to Search.
  6. Text Search
  7. The system will try to fetch results that contains ALL your words.
  8. Once you add keywords, you'll see a new 'Search In' filter that makes your results even more precise.
  9. Text Search
Add to...
You have not created any category. Kindly create one to bookmark this item!
Create New Category
Hide
Title :
Description :
❮❮ Hide
Default View
Expand ❯❯
Close ✕
🔎 Case Laws - Adv. Search
TEXT SEARCH:

Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search

Search In:
Main Text + AI Text
  • Main Text
  • Main Text + AI Text
  • AI Text
  • Title Only
  • Head Notes
  • Citation
Party Name: ?
Party name / Appeal No.
Include Word: ?
Searches for this word in Main (Whole) Text
Exclude Word: ?
This word will not be present in Main (Whole) Text
Law:
---- All Laws----
  • ---- All Laws----
  • GST
  • Income Tax
  • Benami Property
  • Customs
  • Corporate Laws
  • Securities / SEBI
  • Insolvency & Bankruptcy
  • FEMA
  • Law of Competition
  • PMLA
  • Service Tax
  • Central Excise
  • CST, VAT & Sales Tax
  • Wealth tax
  • Indian Laws
Courts: ?
Select Court or Tribunal
---- All Courts ----
  • ---- All Courts ----
  • Supreme Court - All
  • Supreme Court
  • SC Orders / Highlights
  • High Court
  • Appellate Tribunal
  • Tribunal
  • Appellate authority for Advance Ruling
  • Advance Ruling Authority
  • National Financial Reporting Authority
  • Competition Commission of India
  • ANTI-PROFITEERING AUTHORITY
  • Commission
  • Central Government
  • Board
  • DISTRICT/ SESSIONS Court
  • Commissioner / Appellate Authority
  • Other
Situ: ?
State Name or City name of the Court
Landmark: ?
Where case is referred in other cases
---- All Cases ----
  • ---- All Cases ----
  • Referred in >= 3 Cases
  • Referred in >= 4 Cases
  • Referred in >= 5 Cases
  • Referred in >= 10 Cases
  • Referred in >= 15 Cases
  • Referred in >= 25 Cases
  • Referred in >= 50 Cases
  • Referred in >= 100 Cases
From Date: ?
Date of order
To Date:
TMI Citation:
Year
  • Year
  • 2025
  • 2024
  • 2023
  • 2022
  • 2021
  • 2020
  • 2019
  • 2018
  • 2017
  • 2016
  • 2015
  • 2014
  • 2013
  • 2012
  • 2011
  • 2010
  • 2009
  • 2008
  • 2007
  • 2006
  • 2005
  • 2004
  • 2003
  • 2002
  • 2001
  • 2000
  • 1999
  • 1998
  • 1997
  • 1996
  • 1995
  • 1994
  • 1993
  • 1992
  • 1991
  • 1990
  • 1989
  • 1988
  • 1987
  • 1986
  • 1985
  • 1984
  • 1983
  • 1982
  • 1981
  • 1980
  • 1979
  • 1978
  • 1977
  • 1976
  • 1975
  • 1974
  • 1973
  • 1972
  • 1971
  • 1970
  • 1969
  • 1968
  • 1967
  • 1966
  • 1965
  • 1964
  • 1963
  • 1962
  • 1961
  • 1960
  • 1959
  • 1958
  • 1957
  • 1956
  • 1955
  • 1954
  • 1953
  • 1952
  • 1951
  • 1950
  • 1949
  • 1948
  • 1947
  • 1946
  • 1945
  • 1944
  • 1943
  • 1942
  • 1941
  • 1940
  • 1939
  • 1938
  • 1937
  • 1936
  • 1935
  • 1934
  • 1933
  • 1932
  • 1931
  • 1930
Volume
  • Volume
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 6
  • 7
  • 8
  • 9
  • 10
  • 11
  • 12
TMI
Example : 2024 (6) TMI 204
By Case ID:

When case Id is present, search is done only for this

Sort By:
RelevanceDefaultDate
    No Records Found
    ❯❯
    MaximizeMaximizeMaximize
    0 / 200
    Expand Note
    Add to Folder

    No Folders have been created

      +

      Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?

      NOTE:

      Case Laws
      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Results Found:
      AI TextQuick Glance by AIHeadnote
      Show All SummariesHide All Summaries
      No Records Found

      Case Laws

      Back

      All Case Laws

      Showing Results for :
      Reset Filters
      Showing
      Records
      ExpandCollapse
        No Records Found

        Case Laws

        Back

        All Case Laws

        Showing Results for : Reset Filters
        Case ID :

        📋
        Contents
        Note

        Note

        -

        Bookmark

        print

        Print

        Login to TaxTMI
        Verification Pending

        The Email Id has not been verified. Click on the link we have sent on

        Didn't receive the mail? Resend Mail

        Don't have an account? Register Here

        <h1>Tax Tribunal Upholds Commissioner's Action on Section 263, Excludes Items from Deduction Calculation</h1> <h3>M/s Alidhra Texspin Engineers Versus CIT, Valsad</h3> The Tribunal upheld the Commissioner of Income Tax's action under Section 263, finding the assessment order erroneous and prejudicial to revenue due to ... Revision u/s 263 - Commissioner has held that the exemption under section 80IB will not admissible on the duty draw back income and interest income because it was not derived from undertaking - Held that:- In the present case, CIT issued notice after the decision of Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty Shoes (2009 (8) TMI 63 - SUPREME COURT ) construed the meaning of expression 'profits derived from industrial undertaking'. The Hon'ble Supreme Court has explained the meaning of this expression and held that expression 'derived' has a narrow connotation. The duty draw back has not first degree nexus with the industrial undertaking. These are being received as incentive benefits under the incentive provisions. Thus, such amount cannot be termed as 'derived from industrial undertaking', and not eligible for deduction. On due consideration of all these facts and circumstances, we are of the view that the ld. Commissioner of Income Tax has appreciated the facts in right perspective while taking cognizance under section 263 of the Income Tax Act. - Decided against assessee. Issues Involved:1. Validity of the Commissioner of Income Tax (CIT) taking cognizance under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act.2. Admissibility of deduction under Section 80IB on duty drawback and interest income.3. Impact of subsequent Supreme Court decisions on previously settled assessments.4. Jurisdiction of CIT under Section 263 when the issue has merged with the order of the CIT(A).Detailed Analysis:1. Validity of CIT Taking Cognizance Under Section 263:The primary grievance of the assessee was that the CIT erred in taking cognizance under Section 263 of the Income Tax Act and revising the assessment order dated 26.12.2008. The CIT believed that the assessment order was erroneous and prejudicial to the interests of the revenue, as it included items (duty drawback and interest income) not eligible for deduction under Section 80IB. The Tribunal upheld the CIT's action, noting that the CIT must record satisfaction that the order of the AO is erroneous and prejudicial to the interest of the Revenue. The Tribunal emphasized that the CIT's power under Section 263 includes examining records and forming an opinion that the AO's order is erroneous and prejudicial to the revenue, and then issuing a show cause notice to the assessee.2. Admissibility of Deduction Under Section 80IB:The assessee claimed a deduction under Section 80IB, including duty drawback and interest income. The CIT held that these items were not derived from the industrial undertaking and thus not eligible for deduction under Section 80IB. The Tribunal referred to the Supreme Court's decision in Liberty India Vs. CIT, which clarified that duty drawback and DEPB do not qualify as profits derived from industrial undertakings. The Tribunal agreed with the CIT's exclusion of these items from the deduction calculation.3. Impact of Subsequent Supreme Court Decisions:The Tribunal addressed the assessee's argument that the AO's decision, based on the prevailing jurisdictional High Court ruling, should not be considered erroneous due to a subsequent Supreme Court decision. The Tribunal rejected this argument, stating that the Supreme Court's interpretation of a statute is a declaration of what the law has always been. Therefore, the AO's order, which included duty drawback in the Section 80IB deduction, was erroneous as per the Supreme Court's interpretation.4. Jurisdiction of CIT Under Section 263:The assessee argued that the issue had merged with the order of the CIT(A), and thus the CIT could not take cognizance under Section 263. The Tribunal noted that the CIT(A) had decided the appeal before the Supreme Court's decision in Liberty India, and therefore, the CIT(A) did not consider the issue in light of the Supreme Court's interpretation. The Tribunal held that the CIT could exercise jurisdiction under Section 263 to correct the assessment order in accordance with the Supreme Court's decision.Conclusion:The Tribunal dismissed both appeals of the assessee, upholding the CIT's action under Section 263 and confirming the disallowance of the deduction under Section 80IB on duty drawback and interest income. The Tribunal emphasized that the CIT's revision powers were correctly exercised, and the subsequent Supreme Court decision justified the revision of the assessment order.

        Topics

        ActsIncome Tax
        No Records Found