The Dy. Commissioner of Oncome tax 8(3), Room No. 217, Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Mumbai 400 020. Vs. M/s S.B. & T International Ltd., G-3, SEEPZ, Gems & Jewellery Complex, Andher (E), Mumbai- 400 096.
August, 21st 2014
IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL "G" BENCH, MUMBAI
BEFORE S/SHRI H.L. KARWA, HON'BLE PRESIDENT AND N.K. BILLAIYA, AM
.. , . . ,
./I.T.A. No.4122 /Mum/2010
( / Assessment Year : 2001-2002
The Dy. Commissioner of / M/s S.B. & T
Oncome tax 8(3), Vs. International Ltd.,
Room No. 217, G-3, SEEPZ, Gems &
Aayakar Bhavan, Jewellery Complex,
M.K. Marg, Andher (E),
Mumbai 400 020. Mumbai- 400 096.
. / PAN : AAACS7275C
( /Appellant) .. ( / Respondent)
Appellant by Smt. Abha Kala Chanda
Respondent by : Dr. P. daniel
/ Date of Hearing : 19-08-2014
/Date of Pronouncement : 19-8-2014
/ O R D E R
PER N.K. BILLAIYA, A.M. :
. . ,
This appeal by the Revenue is preferred against the order of ld. CIT(A)-
18 dated 26-02-2010 pertaining to A.Y. 2001-02.
2. The revenue has raised six grounds of appeal. At the outset, the ld.
Representatives of both the sides have agreed that the issues raised by the
Revenue are squarely covered in favour of the assessee by the earlier order of
the Tribunal and also by the order of the Hon'ble Supreme Court.
2 ITA 4122/M/10
3. Ground No. 1 & 2 relates to the exemption u/s 10A of the Income Tax
Act, 1961. The ld. CIT(A) has considered this issue vide para 4 of his order on
page 2 and vide para 4.3. The ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of the
Tribunal in assessee's own case for A.Y. 1999-2000, 2000-01, 2002-03, 2003-
04 and 2004-05. As the ld. CIT(A) has followed the decision of the Tribunal in
assessee's own case, we do not find any infirmity in the findings of the ld.
CIT(A). Ground No. 1 & 2 are accordingly dismissed.
4. Ground No. 3 & 4 relates to the deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act on
interest of Rs. 55,76,441/-. This issue has been considered by the ld. CIT(A)
vide para 5 on page 6 of his order. While granting relief to the assessee, the
ld. CIT(A) followed the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in the case of
Lalson Enterprises, 89 ITD 25. We find that identical issue came up for
hearing before the Tribunal in ITA No. 4352/Mum/2005 and C.O. No.
89/Mum/2006 and the Tribunal vide its order dated 30-05-2008 has
dismissed this grievance of the Revenue vide para 19 on page No. 10 of its
order. We fail to understand how the Revenue is aggrieved when it has lost its
first round of assessment. Ground No. 3 & 4 are accordingly dismissed.
5. Ground No. 5 relates to the deduction u/s 80HHC of the Act in respect
of export incentives of Rs. 94,98,048/-. This issue stands covered in favour
of the assessee by the decision of the Hon'ble Supreme Court in the case of
Topman Exports vs. CIT,  342 ITR 49 (SC). We accordingly direct the
A.O. to decide this issue afresh in the light of the decision of Hon'ble Supreme
Court in the case of Topman Exports (supra).
3 ITA 4122/M/10
6. In the result, the appeal filed by the assessee is allowed.
Order pronounced in the open court on 19th August, 2014.
(H.L. KARWA) (N.K. BILLAIYA)
/PRESIDENT ACCOUNTANT MEMBER
. ../ R.K., Sr. PS
/Copy of the Order forwarded to :
1. / The Appellant
2. / The Respondent.
3. () / The CIT(A)- 18, Mumbai
4. / CIT- 8, Mumbai
5. , , / DR, ITAT, Mumbai G Bench
6. / Guard file.
/ BY ORDER,
/ (Dy./Asstt. Registrar)
, / ITAT, Mumbai