1 itxa4262-09 agk IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.4262 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax – 8, Mumbai ..Appellant. Versus Shreeji Jewellery Limited ..Respondent. Mr.Suresh Kumar for the appellant. Mr.M. Subramanian with Mr.V.S. Hadade for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & R.M. Savant, JJ. DATE : 14th December, 2010. P.C. : 1. Heard. Admit on the following substantial questions of law. a) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the deduction u/s.10A is allowable in respect of foreign exchange fluctuation gain of Rs.1,21,77,616/- (prior period Rs. 22,90,567/- & Rs.98,87,089/- for the year under consideration) for the purpose of computation of deduction u/s. 10A of the I.T. Act 1961 ? b) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the interest income is eligible for deduction u/s.10A and whether netting of interest income against interest payment be allowed ? c) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the job work receipts (partly treated as Income from other sources) is entitled for exemption u/s.10A of the I.T. Act ? 2. Counsel for the parties state that the first question is answered 2 itxa4262-09 against the Revenue and in favour of the assessee by the decision of this Court in the case of CIT V/s. Gem Plus Jewellery reported in (2010) 223 CTR (Bom) 248. In so far as the second question is concerned, the same is answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee by the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Asian Star Limited reported in 326 ITR 56. Accordingly, the first question is answered in favour of the assessee and the second question is answered in favour of the Revenue. 3. In so far as the third question is concerned, counsel for both the parties state that in the light of the decision of this Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Dresser Rand India Private Limited reported in 323 ITR 429, the appeal may be remanded back to the Tribunal for consideration afresh in accordance with law. Accordingly, the third question is restored to the file of the Tribunal for consideration afresh in accordance with law and in the light of decision of this Court in Dresser Rand (supra). 4. The appeal is accordingly disposed off with no order as to costs. (R.M. Savant, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)