IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 1343 OF 2007 The Commissioner of Income Tax-13 ..Appellant vs. M/s J.Harkishandas & Co. ..Respondents Mr.P.S.Sahadevan for appellant. None for the respondents. CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN CORAM: Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN & S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ. S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ. S.J.KATHAWALLA JJ. 21st 21st 21st July 2008 July 2008 July 2008 P.C. P.C. P.C. 1. Heard the learned Counsel appearing for the appellant. None appears for the respondents though served. 2. By the present appeal the appellant has sought to raise the following substantial question of law. "Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case and in law the Tribunal is right in holding that while computing the deduction under sec.80HHC of the Act in respect of business of export of trading of goods, the cost of goods in respect of which export proceeds have not been realised should be reduced from the direct cost ignoring the fact that as per sec.80HHC(#) what is deductible from export turnover is direct and indirect cost attributable to such exports (not such export turnover)?" 3. We have perused the judgment of the Tribunal dated 30th November, 2005 and for the reasons stated in paragraphs 8 and 23 of the said judgment, the Tribunal has in fact fully concurred with the view of the CIT (Appeals) holding that with regard to the impugned goods admittedly no amount has been received in convertible foreign exchange and, therefore, the same do not qualify for deduction under section 80HHC of the Act. Similarly, the Tribunal has also observed that it is quite logical and in accordance with the accounting principle that the value of the goods to that extent should also not form part of total turnover. The appeal is totally devoid of any merits. The same is dismissed. (S.J (S.J (S.J.KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.) KATHAWALLA J.) (Dr.S.RADHAKRISHNAN J.)