High Court of DelhiITA/1028/2011

Cit v. Maruti Suzuki India Ltd

2017-12-07Cases Pertaining To Spl.Division Benches3 pages

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI + ITA No. 1027/2011

Reserved on: 11th November 2017

Decided on: 7th December, 2017 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI ....Appellant Through:

Mr. Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr.

Sanjay Kumar, Advocates.

versus MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.

..... Respondent Through :

Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Mr. S. Sukumaran, Mr. Anand Sukumar, Mr. Bhuwan Dhoopar, Ms. Roopali Gupta and Mr.

Bhupesh Pathak, Advocates.

AND + ITA No. 1028/2011 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, DELHI ...Appellant Through:

Mr. Mr. Rahul Chaudhary and Mr.

Sanjay Kumar, Advocates.

versus MARUTI SUZUKI INDIA LTD.

..... Respondent Through :

Mr. S. Ganesh, Senior Advocate with Ms. Kavita Jha, Mr. S. Sukumaran,

Mr. Anand Sukumar, Mr. Bhuwan Dhoopar, Ms. Roopali Gupta and Mr.

Bhupesh Pathak, Advocates.

CORAM: JUSTICE S. MURALIDHAR JUSTICE PRATHIBA M. SINGH

JUDGMENT

% 07.12.2017 Dr. S. Muralidhar, J.

1. These are appeals by the Revenue against the impugned order dated 29th October 2010 passed by the ITAT in ITA Nos. 4444/Del/2007 and 662/Del/2008 for the Assessment Years (AYs) 1995-96 and 1996-97.

2. On 1st September 2011, the following question of law was framed for consideration in ITA No. 1027 of 2011:

"Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that Rs. 43,33,72,336/- on account of duty drawback had not accrued and become payable to the assessee and cannot be included in the taxable income of the assessee for the assessment year 1995-96?"

3. On 1st September 2011, the following question of law was framed for consideration in ITA No. 1028 of 2011:

"Whether the Tribunal is right in holding that Rs. 24,10,01,489/- on account of duty drawback had not accrued and become payable to the assessee and cannot be included in the taxable income of the assessee for the assessment year 1996-97?"

4. In view of the decision of this Court today in ITA No. 250 of 2005, the above questions are answered in the affirmative, i.e. in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue.

5. The appeals are dismissed.

S. MURALIDHAR, J.

PRATHIBA M. SINGH, J.

DECEMBER 07, 2017 Rm