TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2026 (5) TMI 1250
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....unds of appeal: "1 That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred, both on facts and in law, in upholding the order of the Ld. AO with respect to the disallowance, Imposition of tax and interest with reference thereto, the quantification of taxable income and tax liability, which are unjustified, erroneous, and unsustainable. 2. That the Ld. CIT(A) has erred both on facts and in law in upholding the order of the Ld. AO with respect to disallowing the Appellants claim for refund towards under the Focus Product Scheme / Focus Market Scheme as capital receipt, in computation of total income under the normal provisions as well as while computing book profit under Section 115JB of the Act. 3. That in view of the judgment of Hon'ble Bom....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ed income u/s. 143(3) dated 23.12 .2016. 3.1 Aggrieved with the order, the assessee preferred an appeal before ld. CIT(A). However, the appeal was dismissed by ld. CIT(A) vide order dated 30.08.2025. Further aggrieved, the assessee has preferred an appeal before the Tribunal. 4. Before us ld. AR, submitted that ld. CIT(A) has erred in not considering the assessee's ground of appeal by erroneously relying on Goetze India Ltd. (supra). He placed reliance on the decision of Hon'ble Apex Court in Jute Corporation of India Vs. CIT (1991) 187 ITR 688 in support of his claim that the issue should have been considered by ld. CIT(A) by way of addition ground. He further relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of NTPC Vs....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....eedings. While the ld. AO relied on the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in Goetze India Ltd. (supra), to reject the additional claim, we are of the considered view that the same sought to have been examined by the ld. CIT( A) during the appellate proceedings. 6.1 We further note that the same is decided in assessee's favour in the immediately succeeding assessment year by the co-ordinate bench in similar facts and circumstances. In ITA No. 1231/Del/2019 for A.Y. 2014-15, the co-ordinate bench has allowed the claim and held as under: "48 . We have gone through the scheme of the legal framework of the scheme of Foreign Trade Policy and Chapter-1B pertaining to special focus initiatives which reads as under: "With a vie....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....ispute that this incentive is an export incentive. The matter has been well considered by the order of the Co-ordinate of ITAT Chennai in the case of Eastman Exports Global Clothing Pvt. Ltd. in ITA No. 47 /MDS./ 2016 dated 17.05.2016. The order dealt with the similar issue of market l inked focus products scheme scripts has been deliberated and the same has been treated as a capital receipt in view of the decision of the Hon'ble Apex Court in the case of Ponni Sugars and Chemicals Ltd. 306 ITR 392. The relevant part of the order is as under: (Factual matrix) "2 . ...... the assessee submitted that the assessee received Market Linked Focus Product Scheme scrips on export of knitted garments. The Market Linked Focus Product Scheme w....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... on the business more profitably, then the receipt is on the revenue account. On the other hand, if the object of assistance was to enable the assessee to set up a new unit or expand the existing unit, then the receipt is on the capital account. In the case before us, the Government of India provided the incentive for exploring the new markets across the globe. Exploring a new market for a specified area would naturally expand the market area of the assessee. The incentive given to the assessee is not for running the business profitably but for expanding the market area. Therefore, this Tribunal is of the considered opinion that the incentive given by the Government to the assessee for exploring the new market is a capital receipt, hence it....