TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2002 (8) TMI 95
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ort of marine products. The assessee filed a return of income for the assessment year 1991-92 on March 27, 1992, declaring taxable income of Rs. 19,800 which was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Income-tax Act (hereinafter referred to as "the Act"). Thereafter, the Assessing Officer issued notice under section 148 of the Act and the assessment was completed under section 143(3) determining the total income of Rs. 17,58,230. While working out the deduction under section 80HHC, the assessee has included export bills amounting to Rs. 11,10,377 which have not been realised before six months from the end of the assessment year. The Chief Commissioner of Income-tax has permitted the assessee to bring the sale proceeds to India in conver....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....,10,377 and Rs. 15,23,037. The Tribunal accepted the two other contentions of the assessee. The first contention was that the Assessing Officer was not correct in denying proportionate deduction under section 80HHC of the Act on Rs. 11,10,377. The next ground raised before the Tribunal was that as the appellant was not able to realise the export proceeds of Rs. 11,10,377, the entire amount should have been allowed as deduction in the computation of the total income. The Tribunal gave a direction to the Assessing Officer to exclude the amount while computing the income under the head "Business". The other ground addressed to the Tribunal was with regard to interest. The Tribunal held that in a case of regular assessment the interest is from ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....or that refund is due to the assessee. In this case there was no proceeding under section 143(2) or (3). The return was processed under section 143(1)(a) of the Act. Then notice was issued under section 148 and finally, the order was passed under section 143(3) of the Act. The contention of the assessee is that since no order was passed under section 143(3) of the Act before the notice was issued under section 148, the procedure under section 148 of the Act is invalid. We are not able to appreciate the contention of learned counsel for the assessee. Even though many decisions were cited before us, it is not necessary for us to refer to all those decisions. We refer to the decision in Mahanagar Telephone Nigam Ltd. v. Chairman, CBDT [2000]....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....e Thomas [2002] 253 ITR 553 (Ker), it has been held that interest on bank deposits does not constitute business income for the purpose of section 80HHC of the Act. We agree with the above decision and hold that the amount is not deductible. Another amount for which deduction was sought was an amount of Rs. 11,10,377. This represents export sale proceeds which could not be brought into India in convertible foreign exchange. Here, as rightly held by the Tribunal, the amount was not brought into India within six months. In view of the above, we agree with the Tribunal and answer the point against the assessee. These are points which arise from the appeals filed by the assessee. So far as the appeal filed by the Department is concerned, the qu....