https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763767 The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the lower authorities and the ITAT, which treated the disputed amount as miscellaneous income. The court held that the assessee failed to meet the burden of proof to demonstrate that the receipts in question were derived from export business, as required under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the claimed deductions were not applicable, and 90% of the amount was excluded from business profits in accordance with Explanation (baa) of Section 80HHC. The substantial question of law was answered against the assessee. en-us Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 Fri, 27 Dec 2024 09:00:36 +0530 TaxTMI RSS Generator https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763767 The court dismissed the appeal, affirming the decisions of the lower authorities and the ITAT, which treated the disputed amount as miscellaneous income. The court held that the assessee failed to meet the burden of proof to demonstrate that the receipts in question were derived from export business, as required under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. Consequently, the claimed deductions were not applicable, and 90% of the amount was excluded from business profits in accordance with Explanation (baa) of Section 80HHC. The substantial question of law was answered against the assessee. Case-Laws Income Tax Wed, 18 Dec 2024 00:00:00 +0530 https://www.taxtmi.com/caselaws?id=763767