IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.88 of 2011 Date of decision: 26.4.2011 Commissioner of Income Tax. -----Appellant. Vs. M/s Sheena Exports. -----Respondent. CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Standing Counsel for the appellant. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred by the revenue under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi dated 16.10.2009 in ITA No.296/Del/2009for the assessment year 2003-04 claiming following substantial question of law:- “Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble ITAT was right in law in upholding the order of the CIT(A), directing the Assessing Officer to allow deduction u/s 80 HHC, on export incentives, received by the assessee as a supporting manufacturer in the same manner, as in the case of direct exporter?” I.T.A. No.88 of 2011 Learned counsel for the appellant fairly states that the matter is covered against the revenue by order of this Court dated 17.1.2011 in I.T.A. No.769 of 2010 in CIT v. M/s Sheena Exports. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE April 26, 2011 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 2