Punjab-Haryana High Court
Paliwal Home Furnishings vs Commissioner Of Income Tax on 4 December, 2009
Bench: Satish Kumar Mittal, Mehinder Singh Sullar
Income Tax Appeal No.423 of 2009 1
IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH.
Income Tax Appeal No.423 of 2009
Date of Decision:- 4.12.2009
Paliwal Home Furnishings, Gohana Road, Panipat
---Appellant
Versus
Commissioner of Income Tax, Karnal
---Respondent
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE SATISH KUMAR MITTAL
HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE MEHINDER SINGH SULLAR
Present:- Mr.Devinder Kumar, Advocate for the appellant.
SATISH KUMAR MITTAL, J. (ORAL)
The assessee has filed the instant appeal under section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order dated 24.10.2008 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (hereinafter referred to as "the ITAT") in ITA No.2265/Del/2008, in the case of assessee for the Assessment Year 2002-2003, raising the following substantial questions of law:-
I. Whether the Duty draw back received is an amount derived and eligible for claim u/s 80IB? II. Whether the Duty Entitlement Pass Book Scheme received is an amount derived and eligible for claim u/s 80IB?
III.Whether on the true and correct interpretation of the provisions of sec.80HHC r.w. section 80IA(9) r.w. Section 80IB(13) the Tribunal has erred in restricting the claim of deductions under the Act?
IV.Whether on the true and correct interpretation of the provisions of section 147 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, Income Tax Appeal No.423 of 2009 2 the initiation of the proceedings in pursuance to the judgment of CIT Vs. Sterling Foods (1999) 237 ITR 579 (SC) is covered within the words "reasons to believe"?
Learned counsel for the assessee very fairly concedes that all the aforesaid substantial questions have already been decided against the assessee by this Court in Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2007) 293 ITR 520, which has been affirmed by the Hon'ble Supreme Court of India in Liberty India v. Commissioner of Income Tax (2009) 317 Income Tax Reports 218 (SC).
In view of above, this appeal is dismissed, as no substantial question of law is arising from the impugned order.
(Satish Kumar Mittal) Judge (Mehinder Singh Sullar) 4.12.2009 Judge AS