TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2008 (2) TMI 327
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....proposing following substantial questions of law:- 1.Whether on the facts and in law , the ITAT was correct in upholding that the Central Sales Tax and Sales Tax be not formed the part of total turnover while computing of deduction u/s 80 HHC ? 2.Whether on facts and in law, the Tribunal was right to uphold the order of the CIT (A) that the premium on sale of export quota, as incentive, which is not covered u/s 28(iiia), 28(iiib) and 28(iiic) of the Income Tax Act, be treated as 'Business Income' instead of 'income from other sources' in computation of deduction u/s 80 HHC ? 3. Whether on the facts and in law, the ITAT was legally right in dismissing revenue appeal on exclusion of 90 % of interest income assessable under the head '....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
...."During the assessment proceedings u/s 143(3) of the Income Tax Act, 1961, the Assessing Officer has noticed that the assessee has not included Sales Tax and CST in the total turnover for the purposes of deduction u/s 80 HHC. The Assessing officer finalized the assessment by including the Sales Tax and Central Sales Tax at Rs.34331/- in the total turnover for computation of deduction u/s 80 HHC. The Assessing Officer held that the premium on sale of export quota is not treated as export incentive as it is not covered in any of the sections 28(iiia) to 28(iiic) of the income Tax Act,1961. The Assessing Officer treated the amount as 'any other receipt of similar nature', while computing the profit of the business as per explanation (baa....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ompany M/s Eveline International relevant to Assessment Year 2002-03 adjudicated the matter in favour of the assessee. 7. Being not satisfied with the findings of the CIT(A), the Revenue preferred appeal before the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal who vide their order passed on 25.5.2006 has dismissed the appeal partly by upholding the decision of CIT(A)-I, Ludhiana on the following issues:- 1. The Tribunal relied upon the decision of High Court of Bombay in the case of CIT Vs. Sudarshan Chemical Industries Ltd. (2000) 245 ITR 769 (Bom.), dismissed the ground of appeal of Revenue and upheld the decision of CIT(A). 2. The Tribunal also dismissed the ground of appeal of the Revenue regarding treating the premium on sale of export quota ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ssing Officer. The interest income is not derived from exports so as to be eligible for deduction u/s 80 HHC. Department has already preferred an appeal u/s 260 A against such order. iii) The Tribunal erred in law and on facts in dismissing the appeal on the ground regarding exclusion of 90 % of interest income assessable under the head 'income from other sources' from the business profit, following its own decision in the instant case. 9. Learned counsel for the parties have been heard and the record perused. 10. A perusal of the order dated 13.2.2007 would show that this Court has already found that question No.1 as raised by the counsel for the appellant is covered against the Revenue by the order passed by this Court in t....