Indian Kanoon - Search engine for Indian Law

Gujarat High Court

Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax vs Bilag Industries Pvt. ... on 26 April, 2017

Author: M.R. Shah

Bench: M.R. Shah, B.N. Karia

                  O/TAXAP/251/2017                                                ORDER




           IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD

                                 TAX APPEAL NO. 251 of 2017

         ==========================================================
                    PR. COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX....Appellant(s)
                                       Versus
                        BILAG INDUSTRIES PVT. LTD....Opponent(s)
         ==========================================================
         Appearance:
         MR SUDHIR M MEHTA, ADVOCATE for the Appellant(s) No. 1
         ==========================================================

         CORAM:HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH
               and
               HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE B.N. KARIA

                                     Date : 26/04/2017

                              ORAL ORDER

(PER : HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE M.R. SHAH) 1.00. Feeling aggrieved and dissatisfied with the impugned judgement and order passed by the learned Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad dated 5/8/2016 passed in ITA No.1441/Ahd/2006 for A.Y. 2002-03, the revenue has preferred the present appeal with the following proposed questions of law :-

                      "[A]            Whether             in       the         facts           and
                      circumstances           of       the      case,        the       ITAT          is

justified in holding that the receipt resulting out of exchange rate difference pertaining to the export made by the assessee was not the profit of business within the meaning of section 80HHC of Income Tax Act, 1961?

                                            Page 1 of 2

HC-NIC                                   Page 1 of 2       Created On Wed Aug 16 06:38:52 IST 2017
                   O/TAXAP/251/2017                                            ORDER




                      [B]     Whether the ITAT has erred in law and in

fact in holding that the choice of the CUP as MAM, was erroneous ?"

2.00. Now, so far as the proposed question No.[A] is concerned, it is not in dispute that the same is now not res- integra in view of the decision of the Division Bench of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax Versus Priyanka Gems, reported in (2014) 367 ITR 575 (Gujarat). Thus, proposed question [A] is held to be against the revenue. In view of the above, present appeal is dismissed qua proposed question [A].

3.00. Present appeal is admitted to consider the following substantial question of law :-

"Whether the ITAT has erred in law and in fact in holding that the choice of the CUP as MAM, was erroneous ?"

4.00. To be heard with Tax Appeal No.403 of 2016.

Sd/-

(M.R. SHAH, J.) Sd/-

(B.N. KARIA, J.) Rafik.

HC-NIC Page 2 of 2 Created On Wed Aug 16 06:38:52 IST 2017