These three appeals arise from order of learned CIT(A)-III Jaipur, vide his order dated 10-7-2003 for assessment year 1998-99, dated 9-7-2003 for assessment years 1999-2000 and 2001-02. Since issue in all three appeals is common, therefore, all appeals are being taken up together for sake of convenience. Appeal No. 638/Jp/2003, assessment year 1998-99 2. Ground of revenue in this appeal is that on facts and in circumstances of case, learned CIT(A) has erred in including export through export house in export turnover while computing benefits under proviso to sub-section (3) of section 80HHC and thereby allowing deduction of Rs. 2,60,23,142 against allowed by Assessing Officer at Rs. 2,45,98,416. 3. brief facts of this case are that assessee is 100 per cent exporter and total turnover comprises of direct export and export through export, house. During year it received export incentive of Rs. 25,49,584. In original return, deduction under section 80HHC was claimed at Rs. 2,45,98,416 by proportionately reducing deduction in respect of export incentive. Thereafter, assessee revised return by claiming deduction under section 80HHC at Rs. 2,60,23,142 on entire export incentive. calculation of deduction under section 80HHC made in original return and revised return are as under: Particulars Amount Profit of business Net profit as per computation under section 28 2,60,23,143 Less: 90% of export incentive (90% of 28,32,871) 25,49,584 Profit of business 2,34,73,559 Total turnover 10,18,90,229 Direct export turnover 4,49,53,208 Turnover through export house for which disclaimer certificate received 5,69,37,021 Claim under section 80HHC in original return In respect of direct export 2,34,73,559 + 25,49,584 = 4,49,53,208 4,49,53,208 1,14,81,216 10,18,90,229 10,18,90,229 In respect of export through export house: 2,34,73,559 = 5,69,37,021 1,31,17,200 10,18,90,229 2,45,98,416 Claim under section 80HHC in revised return In respect of direct export 2,34,73,559 + 4,49,53,208 25,49,584 =1,29,05,943 10,18,90,229 In respect of export through export house: 2,34,73,559 = 5,69,37,021 1,31,17,200 10,18,90,229 2,60,23,143 4. deduction under section 80HHC in original return was claimed b y assessee in proportion to export sales turnover and total turnover whereas in revised return deduction under section 80HHC was without taking proportion as in original return and assessees contention was that export house is also export and, therefore, same should be considered for purpose of working under section 80HHC. 5. From definition of convertible foreign exchange, export out of India, export turnover, supporting manufacturer it is clear that goods must have been exported out of India and in turn, convertible foreign exchange must have been received by assessee in India from those countries. That only be treated (as) export out of India and will be included in export turnover. export which is made through supporting manufacturer is not direct export to outside India while same is made through Indian company or person resident in India and no convertible foreign exchange is directly received by assessee in that process. Thus, export made through supporting manufacturer cannot be included in definition of export as laid down in clause (b) of Explanation 2 of section 80HHC of Income-tax Act. 6. Under section 80HHC(3), proviso, there is clear mention that, "Provided that profit computed under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of this sub-section shall be further increased by amount which bears to 90 per cent of any sum referred to in clause (iiia) (not being profits on sale of licence acquired from any other person), clauses (iiib) and (iiic) of section 28, same proportion as export turnover bears to total turnover of business carried on by assessee." 7. Accordingly, 90 per cent of export incentive will be allowed for deduction under section 80HHC in proportion of export turnover and total turnover. Thus, assessees claim at 100 per cent deduction for export incentive without following formulas laid down in provisions of sub-section (3) is prima facie incorrect and not allowable. Moreover, export through supporting manufacturer is also not includible in export turnover for purpose of working of deduction for export incentive. Thus, assessees revised claim under section 80HHC was rejected and claim made in original return of income of Rs. 2,45,98,416 was allowed by Assessing Officer. 8. learned CIT(A) found that intention of Legislature was to allow deduction in respect of income from export and export incentives form part of export income. Under scheme of section 80HHC, benefit of deduction of export sale by export house can be claimed either by supporting manufacturer or by export house. It cannot be claimed by both of them. learned CIT(A) relied upon decision of Tribunal Delhi Bench in case of Easter Leather Products (P.) Ltd. v. Dy. CIT [1999] , where it has held that though section 80HHC does not specifically provide benefit for export incentive to supporting manufacturer but considering scheme, benefit of section 80HHC is legitimately admissible to assessee in way similar to benefits available to direct exporter. Where construction results in equity rather than injustice, then such construction should be preferred to literal construction and learned CIT(A) relied upon various judgments in this regard. Therefore, learned CIT(A) held that deduction under section 80HHC is available to assessee under section 80HHC on entire export incentive and it need not to be restricted by treating turnover through export house as local turnover. Therefore, Assessing Officer was directed to allow deduction under section 80HHC at Rs. 2,60,23,142 as against Rs. 2,45,98,416 allowed by Assessing Officer. 9. We have heard rival submissions and perused material on record. main issue in this appeal is whether export turnover as supporting manufacturer, will or will not form part of export turnover for purpose of claiming deduction under section 80HHC in respect of export incentive or, in other words, where assessee direct exporter as well as supporting manufacturer (is) selling goods to export house or which disclaimer certificate is issued by export house, how benefit of deduction under section 80HHC is to be calculated. Before we reach any conclusion we have to analyse various definitions under section 80HHC which are as under: "80HHC(3) For purposes of sub-section (1): (a)Where export out of India is of goods or merchandise manufactured (or processed) by assessee, profits derived from such export shall be amount which bears to profits of business same proportion as export turnover in respect of such goods bears to total turnover of business carried on by assessee; (b)Where export out of India is of trading goods, profits derived from such export shall be export turnover in respect of such trading goods as reduced by direct costs and indirect costs attributable to such export; (c)Where export out of India is of goods or merchandise manufactured (or processed) by assessee and of trading goods, profits derived from such export shall (i)in respect of goods or merchandise manufactured or processed by assessee, be amount which bears to adjusted profits of business, same proportion as adjusted export turnover in respect of such goods bears to adjusted total turnover of business carried on by assessee; and (ii)in respect of trading goods, be export turnover in respect of such trading goods as reduced by direct and indirect costs attributable to export of such trading goods: Provided that profits computed under clause (a) or clause (b) or clause (c) of this sub-section shall be further increased by amount which bears to ninety per cent of any sum referred to in clause (iiia) (not being profits on sale of licence acquired from any other person) and clauses (iiib) and (iiic) of section 28, same proportion as export turnover bears to total turnover of business carried on by assessee. (3A) For purposes of sub-section (1A), profits derived by supporting manufacturer from sale of goods or merchandise shall be, (a)in case where business carried on by supporting manufacturer consists exclusively of sale of goods or merchandise to one or more export houses or trading houses, profits of business. (b)in case where business carried on by supporting manufacturer does not consist exclusively of sale of goods or merchandise to one or more export house or trading houses, amount which bears to profits of business same proportion as turnover in respect of sale to respective export house or trading house bears to total turnover of business carried on by assessee. Explanation.For purposes of this section (a)convertible foreign exchange means foreign exchange which is for time being treated by RBI as convertible foreign exchange for purposes of Foreign Exchange Regulation Act, 1973 (46 of 1973), and any rules made thereunder; (aa)export out of India shall not include any transaction by way of sale or otherwise, in shop, emporium or any other establishment situate in India, not involving clearance at any Customs station as defined in Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962); (b)export turnover means sale proceeds received in, or brought into India by assessee in convertible foreign exchange in accordance with clause (a) of sub-section (2) of any goods or merchandise to which this section applies and which are exported out of India, but does not include freight or insurance attributable to transport of goods or merchandise beyond Customs station as defined in Customs Act, 1962 (52 of 1962); (d)supporting manufacturer means person being Indian company or person (other than company) resident in India manufacturing (including processing) goods or merchandise and selling such goods or merchandise to export house or trading house for purposes of export." 10. Under section 80HHC(1) where assessee being Indian company or person (other than company) resident in India, is engaged in business of export out of India of any goods or merchandise to which this section applies, there shall, in accordance with and subject to provisions of this section, be allowed, in computing total income of assessee, deduction of profits derived by assessee from export of such goods or merchandise. 11. Under section 8OHHC(1A) where assessee, being supporting manufacturer, has during previous year, sold goods or merchandise to any export house or trading house in respect of which export house or trading house has issued certificate under proviso to sub-section (1), there shall, in accordance with subject to provisions of this section, be allowed in computing total income of assessee, deduction of profits derived by assessee from sale of goods or merchandise to export house or trading house in respect of which certificate has been issued by export house or trading house. (2)(a) This section applies to all goods or merchandise, other than those specified in clause (b), if sale proceeds of such goods or merchandise exported out of India are received in, or brought into, India by assessee (other than supporting manufacturer) in convertible foreign exchange within period of six months from end of previous year or where Chief CIT or CIT is satisfied (for reasons to be recorded in writing) that assessee is, for reasons beyond his control, unable to do so within said period of six months, within such further period as Chief CIT or CIT may allow in this behalf. 12. Explanation 1 sale proceeds referred to in clause (a) shall be deemed to have been received in India where such sale proceeds are credited to separate account maintained for purpose by assessee with any bank outside India with approval of RBI. 13. From above definition, it is very clear that for purpose of section 80HHC(1) profit is computed for assessee who is: (i)Who is manufacturing exporter under section 80HHC(3)(a). (ii)Who is trading exporter under section 80HHC(3)(b). (iii)Who is manufacturer and trading exporter under section 80HHC(3)(c). From definition under section 80HHC(3) read with section 80HHC(1) above, we find no provision directly which can deal with situation where assessee is direct exporter as well as supporting manufacturer. 14. But from section 80HHC(3A)( b) read with section 8OHHC(1A) which deals with computation export profit for supporting manufacturer, it is very clear that profits derived by supporting manufacturer from sale of goods or merchandise shall be in case where business carried on by supporting manufacturer does not consist exclusively of sale of goods or merchandise to one or more export houses or trading houses, amount which bears to profits of business same proportion as turnover in respect of sale to respective export house or trading house bears to total turnover of business carried on by assessee. In such cases as is case of assessee, section 80HHC(3A)(b) applies and not section 80HHC(3A)(a). Therefore, profit derived by supporting manufacturer on sale of goods or merchandise shall be amount which bears to profits of business same proportion as turnover in respect of sale to respective export house or trading house bears to total turnover of business carried on by assessee. As per Explanation (b) to section 80HHC, export turnover means sale proceeds received in or brought into India by assessee in convertible foreign exchange in accordance with section 80HHC(2)(a) of Act. Here also said Explanation makes it clear that money should have been brought into India by assessee, which has not been done by supporting manufacturer. Therefore, statute is very clear about computation of profit in case of supporting manufacturer and also for direct exporter. learned CIT(A) has relied upon decision of in case of Easter Leather Products (P.) Ltd. (supra) where it has been held that though section 80HHC does not specifically provide benefit on export incentive to supporting manufacturer but considering scheme, benefit of section 80HHC is legitimately admissible to assessee in way similar to benefits available to direct exporter. 15. When plain language of statute can be read in its ordinary, natural and grammatical sense, then literal construction of statute should be made. As has been held in case of Innamuri Gopalam and Maddala Nagendrudu v. State of AP [1963] 14 STC 742 (SC): "In construing statutory provision first and foremost rule of construction is literary construction. All that Court has to see at very outset is what does provision say. If provision is unambiguous and if from provision legislative intent is clear, Court need not call into aid other rules of construction of statutes. other rules of construction are called into aid only when legislative intent is not clear." 16. Therefore, in present case provisions in statute are very clear and language of statute cannot be strained. In taxing statute, one has to look what is clearly said. In view of above discussions claim of assessee in revised return without following computation as provided under section 80HHC(3A) read with section 8OHHC(1A) and Explanation (b) to section 80HHC which defines export turnover is not acceptable. Assessing Officer has rightly rejected claim of assessee in revised return for amount of Rs. 2,60,23,142 and rightly accepted claim under section 80HHC for amount of Rs. 2,45,98,416, i.e., income as per original return at Rs. 14,24,730 has rightly been accepted by Assessing Officer. Thus, order of learned CIT(A) is reversed, and appeal of revenue is allowed. Appeal No. 639/Jp/2003, assessment year 1999-2000 17. Ground of revenue in this appeal is that on facts and in circumstances of case, learned CIT(A) has erred in quashing order under section 154 and in directing to allow deduction under section 80HHC at Rs. 6,63,57,215 following his order in assessment year 1998-99. 18. In this appeal, facts of case are similar as in assessees own case in assessment year 1998-99. assessee declared total income of R s . 32,61,492 and return was processed under section 143(1)(a) subsequently assessee filed revised return declaring income of Rs. 3,12,949 and in revised return assessee has claimed deduction under section 80HHC of Rs. 6,63,57,215 instead of deduction of Rs. 6,34,08,672 as claimed in original return of income. learned CIT(A) following his decision in assessment year 1998-99 in assessees appeal No. 486/Jp/2001 allowed claim of Rs. 6,63,57,215 under section 80HHC of Act. 19. Facts and circumstances in this case are similar to assessees own case for assessment year 1998-99 in which decision have been taken by this Bench vide ITA No. 638/Jp/2003 of even date. Following ratio in said case deduction of Rs. 6,34,08,672 under section 80HHC and returned income of Rs. 32,61,492 allowed by Assessing Officer is justified and order of learned CIT(A) is reversed. Thus, this appeal of revenue is also allowed. Appeal No. 640/Jp/2003, assessment year 2001-02 20. Ground of revenue in this appeal is that on facts and in circumstances of case, learned CIT(A) has erred in quashing order under section 154 and in directing to allow deduction under section 80HHC at Rs. 2,99,13,376 following his order in assessment year 1998-99. 21. In this appeal facts of case are similar as in assessees own case in assessment year 1998-99. assessee had made claim of Rs. 3,13,61,881 under section 80HHC which was rectified under section 154 at Rs. 2,99,13,376. facts in this case were similar to appeal for assessment year 1999-2000, therefore, learned CIT(A) following his earlier order allowed assessee deduction of Rs. 3,13,61,681. 22. Facts and circumstances in this case are similar to assessees own case for assessment year 1998-99 in which decision have been taken by this Bench vide ITA No. 638/Jp/2003 of even date. Following ratio in said case, deduction of Rs. 2,99,19,376 under section 80HHC allowed by Assessing Officer is justified and order of learned CIT(A) is reversed who has wrongly accepted claim of assessee as deduction under section 80HHC at Rs. 3,13,61,681. Thus, this appeal of revenue is also allowed. 23. In result, all three appeals of revenue are allowed. *** Assistant Commissioner of Income-tax v. Gad Fashion