1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.2266 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax -10 Mumbai ..Appellant. Vs. M/s. Delta Trans-Conductors Pvt. Ltd. ..Respondent. .... Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr. K.B. Bhujle with Mr. P.V. Bhujle for the Respondent. ..... CORAM: DR. D.Y. CHANDRACHUD, & J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. 4th January, 2010. P.C. : 1. The following questions of law have been framed in the appeal filed by the Revenue against the judgment of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal dated 24th November, 2008 : "a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in deleting the addition of Rs.28,40,894/- being DEEC benefit covered u/s 28(iv) of the I. T. Act, 1961? b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the assessee has not earned any benefit out of DEEC?" 2 2. The issue before the Tribunal arose out of an addition of an amount of Rs.28,40,894/- made by the assessing officer and confirmed by the CIT (Appeals). The assessee had in its computation of income reduced the aforesaid sum as an amount credited to the Profit and Loss Account, being an estimated export incentive benefit under the DEEC Scheme, against which the benefit under the scheme was not utilized during the year. 3. The Tribunal has observed that though the assessee had obtained a Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate, entitling him to an exemption from basic customs duty on imports to be made against the licence, as a matter of fact no imports were made during the Assessment Year in question. The Duty Exemption Entitlement Certificate was, as a matter of fact, also not utilized by the assessee in succeeding years and ultimately it had lapsed. In these circumstances, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the amount had not been received by the assessee nor had any right accrued to receive it in future. The Tribunal observed in paragraph 12 of the 3 judgment that the assessee had not earned any profit or benefit out of the DEEC and the estimated value reflected in the books of account would not be considered in determining the total income of the assessee. No substantial question of law arises in these proceedings. The Appeal is accordingly dismissed. (DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD, J.) (J.P.DEVADHAR, J.)