Search Results Page
Search Results
1 - 3 of 3 (0.41 seconds)Ram Babu And Sons And Anr. vs Union Of India (Uoi) And Anr. on 17 May, 1996
In this connection, we are of the opinion that while deciding the case of Anil Exports in I. T. A. No. 1811/JP of 1992, cited supra, we have discussed similar issue in detail and have examined all the relevant aspects including introduction of Explanation (aa) under Section 80HHC and have followed the decision of the Allahabad High Court reported at Ram Babu and Sons v. Union of India [1996] 222 ITR 606, wherein the High Court has discussed the consequences of introduction of Explanation (aa) which means that it would not be an export out of India if two conditions are satisfied ; (i) it should be a transaction by way of sale otherwise, in a shop, emporium or an establishment situated in India, and (ii) it should not involve clearance in the custom as defined in the Customs Act. Both these conditions must be satisfied if the transaction is to be held to be not an export out of India. If either of these two conditions is not satisfied, it is an export out of India. The High Court, therefore, held that if the transaction involves clearance at customs, it will be an export out of India within the meaning of Explanation (aa). If we examine these provisions in the light of the written submissions made by the learned authorised representative before the Commissioner of Income-tax (Appeals) dated August 10, 1991, and the decision of this Bench cited supra, there can be only decision that would be in favour of the assessee. After examining all the facts and circumstances of the case, we follow our decision cited supra and allow this ground of the assessee for these assessment years."
Tata Exports Ltd. vs Income-Tax Officer on 2 June, 1984
In the case of Anil Exports v. ITO, the facts and conditions regarding clearance have been set out in para. 8, which reads as under :
1