1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1030 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax-18. ...Appellant. Vs. M/s.Rachana Vastra Udyog. ...Respondent. .... Mr. K.R.Chaudhari for the Appellant. Mr. A.K. Jasani for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. January 18, 2010. P.C. : The appeal was admitted on the following substantial questions of law: “(a) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the receipt of duty draw back of Rs.99,04,606/- were income derived from an industrial undertaking for the purpose of deduction u/s.80IB of the I.T.Act, 1961? -(b) Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the receipt of DEPB of rs.77,38,149/- were income derived from an individual undertaking for the purpose of deduction u/s.80HHC of the I.T. Act,1961?” The first question of law is covered against the assessee, by the judgment of the Supreme Court in Liberty India vs. CIT, 2 (2009) 317 ITR 218 (SC). In so far as the second question is concerned, the order of the Tribunal dated 6th February 2008 is set aside by consent and the proceedings are remitted back to the Assessing Officer for a decision, if any, in view of the amendment to the third proviso to sub-section (3) of Section 80HHC(3) by the Taxation Laws (Amendment) Act, 2005. The appeal shall stand disposed of in the aforesaid terms. There shall be no order as to costs. ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, J.)