Calcutta High Court
C.I.T. - I vs Malhotra Global Eximp (P) Ltd on 5 September, 2014
Author: Soumitra Pal
Bench: Soumitra Pal, Debangsu Basak
ORDER SHEET
ITA 416 of 2004
IN THE HIGH COURT AT CALCUTTA
Special Jurisdiction (Income Tax)
ORIGINAL SIDE
C.I.T. - I, KOLKATA
Versus
MALHOTRA GLOBAL EXIMP (P) LTD.
BEFORE:
The Hon'ble JUSTICE SOUMITRA PAL
The Hon'ble JUSTICE DEBANGSU BASAK
Date : 5th September, 2014.
Appearance :
MR.S.N.DUTTA,ADVOCATE
...for appellant.
MR.D.MITRA,ADVOCATE
...for respondent/assessee.
The Court : This appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 has been preferred by the Revenue against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, 'B' Bench, Kolkata dated 26th February, 2004 in ITA No.132(Kol)/2002 for the assessment year 1998-1999 on the following questions :
"1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the CIT (appeal) was justified in directing the Assessing Officer to exclude the amount of insurance and freight from direct cost 2 and compute deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the learned Tribunal was correct in holding that it is well settled that the direct cost as considered by the Assessing Officer for declining the deduction under Section 80HHC has to be excluded by the insurance and freight which was justified as returned by the assessee?"
Heard Mr.Dutta,learned advocate for the appellant/revenue and Mr.Mitra, learned advocate for the respondent/assessee.
It is submitted by Mr.Dutta, learned advocate for the appellant that since insurance and freight, as mentioned in the invoice, has to be paid by the buyer, the order passed by the Tribunal confirming the order passed by the CITA is not in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Act, 1961.
Mr.Mitra, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent/assessee submits that the Tribunal while dismissing the appeal preferred by the Revenue had followed the assessee's own case for the assessment year 1993-1994 and 1995-96.
Heard learned advocates for the parties.
We find as the issue is covered in assessee's own case in ITA No.265 of 2002(CIT, KOLKATA-III vs. M/S.MALHOTRA GLOBAL EXIP(P) LTD.) for the assessment year 1995-96 wherein the Hon'ble Division Bench following the judgement in CIT,Kolkata vs.H.M.Exports Ltd.: 276 ITR 299, had dismissed the 3 appeal preferred by the Revenue, no substantial question of law arises. Therefore, the appeal and the application are dismissed.
Urgent certified copy of this order, if applied for, be given to the appearing parties on priority basis.
(SOUMITRA PAL, J.) (DEBANGSU BASAK, J.) ssaha AR(CR)