Income-tax Appeal No.710 of 2010 -1- **** IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH Income-tax Appeal No.710 of 2010 Date of decision: 17.12.2010 Commissioner of Income-Tax, Karnal ...Appellant Versus M/s Mittal Overseas, G.T.Road, Sewah, Panipat ...Respondent CORAM: HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR.JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present: Mr. Yogesh Putney, Advocate for the appellant. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J ( Oral) . 1. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against order dated 27.11.2009 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Delhi Bench (G), New Delhi in ITA No.2441/Del/2007, for the assessment year 2004-05, proposing following substantial questions of law:- “1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in allowing deduction u/s 80 HHC on the face value of DEPB in the case where turnover exceeds Rs.10 crores in view of proviso (ii), (iii) and (iv) inserted by the taxation law (Amendment) Act, 2005 with retrospective effect from 1.4.1998? Income-tax Appeal No.710 of 2010 -2- **** 2. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Hon'ble ITAT was justified in allowing deduction u/s 80 HHC in respect of entire DEPB amount by incorporating the same in computation of business profit u/s 28 (iiib)?” 2. Learned counsel for the revenue states that the matter is covered in favour of the revenue by order of this Court dated 16.8.2010 in ITA No.299 of 2010 (Commissioner of Income-Tax Vs. M/s F.C.Sondhi & Company (P) Ltd.). 3. In view of the above, following the earlier decision of this Court in F.C.Sondhi's case, the matter is remanded to the Tribunal for fresh decision in accordance with law. It is, however, made clear that if the respondent-assessee is aggrieved by this, it can approach this Court. 4. Accordingly, the appeal is disposed of. (Adarsh Kumar Goel) Judge December 17,2010 (Ajay Kumar Mittal) Pka Judge