2009 (11) TMI 59

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....and Mr. D.K. Goyal, Advocates, for the appellant-assessee. SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. This order shall dispose of Income Tax Appeals No. 628 and 630 of 2009, filed by the assessee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as `the Act'), directed against the order dated 14.5.2009, passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench "C", New Delhi (hereinafter ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... 31.3.2008, while following the decision of the Supreme Court in CIT v. Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 and a decision of the Delhi High Court in CIT v. Ritesh Industries Ltd. 192 CTR 81, denied the deduction of the aforesaid export incentives, on the ground that the Duty Draw Back and DEPB are not the income derived from industrial undertaking, which is eligible for deduction under Section 80-I....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....8 (SC), wherein while dismissing the appeal of the assessee, it has been concluded that Duty Draw Back and DEPB are incentives, which flow from the schemes framed by the Central Govt. or under Section 75 of the Customs Act, 1962 and these incentive profits do not fall within expression "profits derived from industrial undertaking in Section 80-IB of the Act. Therefore, Duty Draw Back and DEPB do n....