$~
*      IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
+                          ITA No. 1027/2011
                                         Reserved on: 11th November 2017
                                          Decided on: 7th December, 2017

       COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI          ....Appellant
                   Through: Mr. Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr.
                            Sanjay Kumar, Advocates.


                                versus

       MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.                   ..... Respondent
                    Through : Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with
                              Ms. Kavita Jha, Mr. S. Sukumaran,
                              Mr. Anand Sukumar, Mr. Bhuwan
                              Dhoopar, Ms. Roopali Gupta and Mr.
                              Bhupesh Pathak, Advocates.


                                AND


+                          ITA No. 1028/2011

       COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI         ...Appellant
                   Through: Mr. Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr.
                   Sanjay Kumar, Advocates.


                                versus

       MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.                    ..... Respondent
                    Through : Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with
                              Ms. Kavita Jha, Mr. S. Sukumaran,

ITA Nos.1027 & 1028/2011                                          Page 1 of 3
                                      Mr. Anand Sukumar, Mr. Bhuwan
                                      Dhoopar, Ms. Roopali Gupta and Mr.
                                      Bhupesh Pathak, Advocates.

       CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR
              JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH
                              JUDGMENT
%                              07.12.2017

Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.
1. These are appeals by the Revenue against the impugned order dated
29th October 2010 passed by the ITAT in ITA Nos. 4444/Del/2007 and
662/Del/2008 for the Assessment Years (AYs) 1995-96 and 1996-97.

2. On 1st September 2011, the following question of law was framed for
consideration in ITA No. 1027 of 2011:
       "Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that Rs. 43,33,72,336/- on
       account of duty drawback had not accrued and become payable to the
       assessee and cannot be included in the taxable income of the assessee
       for the assessment year 1995-96?"






3. On 1st September 2011, the following question of law was framed for
consideration in ITA No. 1028 of 2011:

       "Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that Rs. 24,10,01,489/- on
       account of duty drawback had not accrued and become payable to the
       assessee and cannot be included in the taxable income of the assessee
       for the assessment year 1996-97?"

4. In view of the decision of this Court today in ITA No. 250 of 2005, the
above questions are answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the
Assessee and against the Revenue.








ITA Nos.1027 & 1028/2011                                         Page 2 of 3
5. The appeals are dismissed.




                                   S. MURALIDHAR, J.



                                PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.
DECEMBER 07, 2017
Rm




ITA Nos.1027 & 1028/2011                     Page 3 of 3