TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 730
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....higher deduction under Section 80-HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, made during the course of assessment proceedings for the relevant assessment year?" 2. The facts are in narrow compass and in view of the limited issue, which arises for consideration, we need not refer to the facts in great detail. 3. The appellant-assessee, a firm, during the relevant period was engaged in the business of manufacture and export of goods and merchandise such as leather jackets, shoes, sweaters, jeans, bed sheet etc. In the return of income for the assessment year 1993-94 filed on 31st October, 1993, taxable income of Rs. 64,92,460/- was declared. In the computation of taxable income, the appellant-assessee had claimed deduction under Section 80HHC of the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ls) as well as the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal. They have relied upon decision of the Supreme Court in Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC). 7. A similar controversy had arisen before the Delhi High Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Sam Global Securities Ltd. [2014] 360 ITR 682 (Delhi), wherein judgment in the case of CIT Vs. Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. [2008] 306 ITR 42 (Delhi) was quoted. In Jai Parabolic Springs Ltd. (supra), decision in Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra) was distinguished in the following words:- "In Goetze (India) Ltd. Vs. CIT [2006] 284 ITR 323 (SC) wherein deduction claimed by way of a letter before the Assessing Officer, was disallowed on the ground that there was ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The Appellate Assistant Commissioner must be satisfied that the ground raised was bona fide and that the same could not have been raised earlier for good reasons. The Appellate Assistant Commissioner should exercise his discretion in permitting or not permitting the assessed to raise an additional ground in accordance with law and reason. The same observations would apply to appeals before the Tribunal also." 9. This High Court in CIT Vs. Natraj Stationery Products (P) Ltd., (2009) 312 ITR 222, had observed that Goetze (India) Ltd. (supra) would not apply if the assessee had not made a "new claim" but had asked for re-computation of deduction. Reference can also be made to the decision in Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Rose Services Apartm....