TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2012 (8) TMI 454
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....case of Alfa Laval India Ltd. Vs CIT (266 ITR 418) has not considered the judicial pronouncements in the cases of CIT Vs. Dresser Rand India (P) Ltd. and Liberty India Vs. Commissioner of Income-tax (supra) both of which have been delivered subsequent to the judgment relied upon by the ITAT and the ratio of those judgments are clearly applicable to the case of the assessee involved in the present appeal. It is pertinent to mention here that the Hon. Supreme Court while dismissing the appeal of the Revenue in the case of M/s. Alfa Laval India Ltd. has left open the question for treating sales tax set-off/refund, interest and other refunds received by the assessee, for treating it as part of business profit or not". It was, therefore, submitt....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....) is not maintainable. She, therefore, submits that the order passed by the Tribunal following the order of the Tribunal in assessee's own case does not call for any interference. 5. We have carefully heard the submissions of the rival parties and perused the material available on record. We find that the Tribunal has dealt with the issue of sales tax refund not to be excluded while calculating deduction u/s 80HHC vide para 13 of the order dtd. 10-08-2011 as under:- "13. Having carefully heard the submissions of the rival parties and perusing the material available on record we find merits in the plea of the learned counsel for the assessee that the issue is squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the decision of the Tribunal in the....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ly allowed." Thus the Tribunal has decided the issue following the Tribunal's order in assessee's own case for A.Y. 2002-03 dtd. 21-1-2009. We find merit in the plea of the ld. counsel for the assessee that the decision in the case of Dresser Rand India Pvt. Ltd. (supra) relied on by the ld. D.R., at this stage, was rendered by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court on a concession by counsel appearing on behalf of the assessee, therefore, did not conclude the issue as observed by the Hon'ble jurisdictional High Court in Pfizer Ltd. (supra) appearing at placitum 5-6 of page 66 of 330 ITR as under:- "At the outset it would be necessary for the court to advert to the judgment of this Division Bench dated April 8, 2010, in CIT v. Dresser Rand....