AMBER EXPORTS (INDIA), MUMBAI v. ACIT 20(1), MUMBAI

ITA 6869/MUM/2008 | 2001-2002
Pronouncement Date: 21-05-2010 | Result: Allowed

Appeal Details

RSA Number 686919914 RSA 2008
Assessee PAN AAEFA5935G
Bench Mumbai
Appeal Number ITA 6869/MUM/2008
Duration Of Justice 1 year(s) 5 month(s) 19 day(s)
Appellant AMBER EXPORTS (INDIA), MUMBAI
Respondent ACIT 20(1), MUMBAI
Appeal Type Income Tax Appeal
Pronouncement Date 21-05-2010
Appeal Filed By Assessee
Order Result Allowed
Bench Allotted A
Tribunal Order Date 21-05-2010
Assessment Year 2001-2002
Appeal Filed On 02-12-2008
Judgment Text
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL MUMBAI BENCH A MUMBAI. BEFORE SHRI J. SUDHAKAR REDDY ACCOUNTANT MEMBER AND SHRI VIJAY PAL RAO JUDICIAL MEMBER. I.T.A. 6869 /MUM/2008. ASSESSMENT YEAR : 2001-02. M/S AMBER EXPORT (INDIA) ASSTT. COMMISSIONER OF NEELKANTH COMM. CENTRE VS. INCOME TAX 20(1) GRFLOOR 122/123 SAHAR ROAD MUMBAI. PARSIWADA ANDHERI (E) MUMBAI 400 099. PAN AAEFA5935G APPELLANT RESPONDENT APPELLANT BY : SHRI VIJAY MEHTA. RESPONDENT BY : SHRI VIKRAM GAUR. O R D E R PER J. SUDHAKAR REDDY A.M. THIS IS AN APPEAL FILED BY THE ASSESSEE DIRECTED AGAINST THE ORDER OF THE CIT(APPEALS)-XX MUMBAI DATED 18-09-2 008 FOR ASSESSMENT YEAR 2001-02 ON THE FOLLOWING GROUNDS : 1. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN PASSING THE IMPUGNED ORDER WHICH IS ILLEGAL AND BAD IN LAW. 2. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN AFFIRMING THE ORDER OF THE ASSESSING OFFICER WHEREIN DEPB OF RS.6 9 65 465/- AND DFRC OF RS.43 31 657/- WERE NOT CONSIDERED FOR THE PURPOSE OF COMPUTING DEDUCTION U/S 80HHC OF THE ACT. 3. THE LEARNED CIT(A) HAS ERRED IN LAW AND IN FACTS IN DIRECTING THE ASSESSING OFFICER TO RE-WORK DEDUCTION U/S 80HHC OF THE ACT BY REDUCING 10% OF INCENTIVE AS COST OF EARNING SUCH I NCENTIVE. 2 4. THE LEARNED CIT(A) OUGHT TO HAVE ALLOWED DEDUCTION U/S 80HHC OF THE ACT AS CLAIMED BY THE APPELLANT. 5. THE APPELLANT CRAVE LEAVES TO ADD AMEND ALTER OR DELETE ALL OR ANY OF THE FOREGOING GROUNDS OF APPEAL. 2. WE HAVE HEARD MR. VIJAY MEHTA LEARNED COUNSEL FOR THE ASSESSEE AND MR. VIKRAM GAUR THE LEARNED DR. 3. AFTER TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE FACTS AND C IRCUMSTANCES OF THE CASE A PERUSAL OF THE PAPERS ON RECORD AND THE ORDERS OF THE AUTHORITIES BELOW WE FIND THAT THE ISSUE TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE IN GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 IS COVERED BY THE DECISION OF THE SPEC IAL BENCH OF THE TRIBUNAL IN THE CASE OF TOPMAN EXPORTS VS. ITO REPO RTED IN (2009) 318 ITR (AT) 87 (MUM) (S.B.). RESPECTFULLY FOLLOWING TH E SAME WE ALLOW GROUND NOS. 2 AND 3 TAKEN BY THE ASSESSEE AND SET A SIDE THE ISSUE TO THE FILE OF THE AO FOR FRESH ADJUDICATION IN LINE WITH THE DECISION OF THE SPECIAL BENCH (SUPRA). 4. GROUND NO. 1 4 AND 5 ARE GENERAL IN NATURE AND REQUIRE NO ADJUDICATION. 5. IN THE RESULT THE APPEAL OF THE ASSESSEE IS AL LOWED FOR STATISTICAL PURPOSES. ORDER PRONOUNCED ON THIS 21 ST DAY OF MAY 2010. SD/- SD/- (VIJAY PAL RAO) (J. SUDHAKAR REDDY) JUDICIAL MEMBER. ACCOUNTANT MEMBER. MUMBAI DATED : 21 ST MAY 2010. WAKODE 3 COPY FORWARDED TO : 1. APPELLANT. 2. RESPONDENT 3. C.I.T. 4. CIT(A) 5. DR A-BENCH. (TRUE COPY) BY ORDER ASSTT. REGISTRAR ITAT MUMBAI BENCHES MUMBAI.