I.T.A. No. 356 of 2009 (1) IN THE HIGH COURT OF PUNJAB AND HARYANA AT CHANDIGARH I.T.A. No. 356 of 2009 DATE OF DECISION: 22.7.2009 Linen Rugs, through Shri Rajesh Kumar, S/o Banu ..........Appellant Ram, Partner, 193, Green Park, Vikas Nagar, Tehsil Town, Panipat, Haryana Versus CIT, Aayakar Bhawan, Rohtak ..........Respondent CORAM:- HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE ADARSH KUMAR GOEL HON'BLE MRS. JUSTICE DAYA CHAUDHARY Present:- Mr. Rajiv Sharma , Advocate for the appellant. **** ADARSH KUMAR GOEL, J. (Oral) The assessee has preferred this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, “the Act”) against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, New Delhi Bench 'D', New Delhi dated 21.1.2009 passed in ITA No. 977/DEL/2008 for the assessment year 2004- 05, proposing to raise following substantial questions of law:- (i) “That the ITAT was justified in law in holding that appellant was not entitled to the deduction u/s 80IB in respect of profits and gains arising on account of duty drawback which is intrinsically related/connected to the business profits of the industrial undertaking.” (ii)“That the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in denying the claims of the appellant u/s 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 by blindly relying upon the I.T.A. No. 356 of 2009 (2) judgment of this Hon'ble Court in the case of Liberty India and other judgments which are distinguishable on facts itself.” (iii)“Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the findings of ITAT are perverse and against the evidences on record thus unsustainable in law.” (iv)“Whether the ITAT has misdirected itself in being influenced by irrelevant facts and applying erroneous criteria while deciding the issue of eligibility for claiming deduction under Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961.” Learned counsel for the assessee very fairly states that the matter is covered against the assessee by the judgment of this Court dated 9.9.2008 in ITA No. 629 of 2007 (M/s Raj Oversease Vs. The Commissioner of Income Tax, Ludhiana). In view of above, the appeal is dismissed. (ADARSH KUMAR GOEL) JUDGE July 22, 2009 (DAYA CHAUDHARY) pooja JUDGE Note:-Whether this case is to be referred to the Reporter .......Yes/No