2005 (6) TMI 551

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... revenue against the order of CIT(A) dated 27th September, 2004. 2. The only ground of appeal taken by the revenue is that the learned CIT(A) has erred in allowing deduction under section 80-IB on the amount of duty drawback of ₹ 84,802 3. At the time of hearing, the learned AR of the assessee filed before us copy of the order of the Delhi Bench of the Tribunal in the case of Asstt. CIT v.....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....On the other hand, the learned DR placed reliance on the order of the Assessing Officer. It was further submitted that the issue is covered by the decisions of the Madras High Court in the cases of CIT v. Jameel Leathers 246 ITR 97 and CIT v. Vishwa Nathan & Co. 261 ITR 737. In reply, the counsel of the assessee stated that both these decisions have taken into consideration the decision by the Hon....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....g Officer. The learned DR relied on the order of the Hon'ble Delhi High Court in the case of CIT v. Ritesh Industries Ltd. [2005] 142 Taxman 551 wherein it was held that duty drawback cannot be regarded as profit or gain derived from an industrial undertaking so as to entitle the assessee deduction under section 80-I. Hence, it was his submission that the assessee was not entitled to deduction....