IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH. I.T.A. No.283 of 2004 Date of decision: 13.10.2010 M/s Teeknits. -----Appellant. Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax. -----Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE AJAY KUMAR MITTAL Present:- Mr. Pankaj Jain, Advocate for the appellant. Mr. Rajesh Katoch, Standing Counsel for the respondent. --- ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. This appeal has been preferred by the assessee under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order dated 27.10.2004 of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Chandigarh in I.T.A. No.37/CHANDI/2001 for the assessment year 2000-01 proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- “i That whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has committed an error by disposing off the appeal in a summary manner by mentioning that both the parties have admitted applicability of the decision of IPCA I.T.A. No.283 of 2004 LABORATORY LTD. VS DCIT, 266 ITR 521 (SC) to the facts of this case. ii That whether under the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal has mis-read and mis- interpreted the provision of law vis-à-vis without going into the details bringing out the facts of this case and that of 266 ITR 521 (SC). iiii That whether the Tribunal is justified in law in holding that the net loss u/s 80 HHC(3) a, b & c is to be adjusted against the export incentive read with the proviso to the said sub-section for the purpose of deduction u/s 80HHC(1).” Learned counsel for the appellant fairly states that identical appeal being I.T.A. Nos.284 and 285 of 2004 M/s Teeknits v. CIT has been dismissed by this Court on 7.10.2010. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE October 13, 2010 ( AJAY KUMAR MITTAL ) ashwani JUDGE 2