TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2014 (9) TMI 1269
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....The assessee has raised the following six substantive grounds of appeal:- 1. "The commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals)-36, Mumbai, [hereinafter referred to as the CIT(A)] erred in upholding that receipts by way of DEPB credits do not qualify to be included in the profit derived from the undertaking in the context of section 80IB/80IC/80IE/10B of the Act. 2. The learned CIT(A) has further erred in holding that receipts by way of insurance claims do not qualify to be included in the profits derived from the undertaking in the context of section 80IB/80IC/80IE/10B of the Act and the same claim is restricted to the cost of goods. 3. The learned (CIT) has erred in upholding denial of deduction from the income of the ap....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....issues raised by the assessee have been decided either in favour of the assessee or in favour of the Revenue. 4. Ground No. 1 relates to the exclusion of the receipt by way of DEPB credit as they are not qualify to be included in the profits derived from the undertaking in the context of section 80IB/80IC/80IE/10B of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 5. The issue raised vide this ground has been decided against the assessee by the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of Liberty India Ltd., 317 ITR 218. As the receipts do not have a first degree nexus with the profit derived from the undertaking, respectfully following the judgment of the Hon'ble Supreme Court, ground No. 1 is dismissed. 6. Ground No. 2 is not pressed and is di....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....of the Income tax Act, 1961. 12. This issue was also before the Tribunal in A.Y. 2009-10 in ITA No. 5813/M/2011 order dated 25-7-14. The Tribunal has considered this issue at para 29 of its order wherein it has remanded this matter to the file of the A.O. for adjudicating the issue afresh after affording reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. As no distinguishing fact has been brought to our notice, we restore this issue to the file of the A.O. for adjudicating the issue afresh as per the provisions of law after affording a reasonable opportunity of being heard to the assessee. Ground No. 5 is accordingly allowed for statistical purpose. 13. The issue raised vide ground No. 6 as stated by the ld. Counsel for the assess....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....deduction u/s 80IB. 4. On the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the ld. CIT(A) erred in directing the Assessing Officer to make adjustment to value of opening stock in A.Y. 2010-11 in consonance with adjusted valuation of closing stock in A.Y. 2009-10 without appreciating the fact that : (a) No direction to make adjustment to closing stock has been issued (b) The resultant effect of making adjustment to opening stock would result in the assessed income being lower than returned income, which is not permissible in view of decision in the case of Goetz India Ltd." 16. The first ground relates to the grievance that the ld. CIT(A) erred in not confirming the basis adopted by the A.O. for comput....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... Tribunal in ITA No. 6299/M/2010 for A.Y. 2008-09 vide ground No. 4 of that appeal and has discussed this issue at para 22 of its order. In so far as the proceeds from sale of scrap is concerned, the Tribunal has set aside the issue to the file of the A.O. to be decided afresh whether the sale of scrap has arising during the manufacturing activity or it relates to other scrap proceed and other receipts was accepted to be eligible for deduction u/s 80IB of the Act. The facts and issue being identical, we accordingly set aside the issue relating to the sale of scrap to the file of the A.O. The A.O. is directed to decide the issue afresh in the light of direction given in A.Y. 2008-09. In so far as the other receipts are concerned, respectfull....