IN INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, JAIPUR BENCHES, JAIPUR BEFORE: SHRI BHAGCHAND, AM AND SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM ITA No. 183/JP/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11. Goverdhan Prasad Singhal, cuke Asstt. Commissioner of Income- CC-229, Gole Market, Vs. tax, Circle-6, Jawahar Nagar, Jaipur. Jaipur. PAN No. ACVPS 0236 P Appellant Respondent Assessee by : None Revenue by: Shri R.A. Verma (Addl. CIT) Date of Hearing : 27.09.2016. Date of Pronouncement : 07/10/2016. ORDER PER SHRI KUL BHARAT, JM. This appeal by assessee is directed against order of ld. CIT (A)-5, Jaipur dated 18.01.2016 pertaining to A.Y. 2010-11. solitary ground raised by assessee reads as under :- That on facts and circumstances of case, ld. CIT (Appeals)-5 Jaipur is wrong, unjust and erred in law for upholding action of A.O. of reducing DEPB & Duty Draw Back amounting to Rs. 43,04,175/- from Profit & Gains eligible for deduction u/s 80IB. 2. No one appeared on behalf of assessee. On last date of hearing also no one appeared. issue involved in this appeal is with regard to allowability of DEPB & Duty Draw Back amounting to Rs. 43,04,175/- from Profit & Gains for deduction under section 80IB. 2 ITA No. 183/JP/2016 Goverdhan Prasad Singhal 3. At outset, ld. D/R submitted issue is not res integra. issue is decided by Hon ble Supreme Court in case of Liberty India Ltd vs. CIT, 317 ITR 218. 4. We have heard ld. D/R. ld. CIT (A) has decided this issue in para 2.3 and 2.4 of his order by observing as under :- 2.3. I have considered facts of case, assessment order and submissions of appellant. appellant has claimed deduction u/s 80IB from AY 2010-11 instead of deduction claimed u/s 10BA upto AY 2009-10 since tenure of latter deduction got statutorily concluded w.e.f. 01.04.2010. AO has held that u/s 80IB deduction is allowed on profit and gains derived from eligible business and DEPB benefits and Duty Draw Back are not part of profits and gains derived from eligible business and are hence not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB. issue as to whether Duty Drawback and DEPB benefits are part of profits derived from eligible business and are hence eligible for deduction u/s 80IB has attained finality with order of Apex Court in case of Liberty India vs. CIT (2009), 317 ITR 218, wherein it has been held that Duty Drawback as well as DEPB benefits are not part of profit derived from eligible business and are hence not eligible for deduction u/s 80IB. Therefore, appellant is not entitled for deduction of amount of Duty Drawback and DEPB benefits. 2.4. alternate sub mission of appellant is that while considering deduction u/s 10BA in appellant s own case for AY 2007- 08, Hon ble ITAT, Jaipur Bench, has held that deduction u/s 10BA will be computed after including Duty Drawback and DEPB profits in profit of business as well as total turnover. Hence appellant has argued that similarly for computing deduct ion u/s 80I B for year under consideration, Duty Drawback and DEPB profits should be considered part of profit eligible for deduction. However, I do not find merit in said alternate submission, since issue as to whether DEPB benefits and Duty Drawback are part of profit for purpose of section 80IB, has already attained finality with decision of Apex Court in case of Liberty India (supra). Further, schemes of deduction under s. 80IB differ from that u/s 10BA since latter has concept of profit of business, which is computed in accordance with specific formula, whereas deduction u/s 80IB is available on profits and gains derived from eligible undertaking. wordings used in said two sections differ and, as result, 3 ITA No. 183/JP/2016 Goverdhan Prasad Singhal meaning and method of calculation differ. Thus meaning and method of computation of deduction u/s 10BA cannot be imported into s. 80IB. wordings derived from used in s. 80IB are more restricted in their meaning and would not include income of nature of DEPB profits and Duty Drawback under its ambit as held by Apex Court (supra). Accordingly, denial of deduction u/s 80IB on amounts of DEPB profits and Duty Drawback, is confirmed. This ground of appeal is dismissed. We, therefore, do not see any reason to interfere in order of ld. CIT (A) as issue is squarely covered by judgment of Hon ble Apex Court rendered in case of Liberty India Ltd. vs. CIT (supra). Hence ground of assessee is dismissed. 5. In result, appeal of assessee is dismissed. Order is pronounced in open court on 07/10/2016. Sd/- Sd/- ( BHAGCHAND) ( KUL BHARAT ) Accountant Member Judicial Member Jaipur Dated:- 07/10/2016. Das/ Copy of order forwarded to: 1. Appellant- Shri Goverdhan Prasad Singhal, Jaipur. 2. Respondent ACIT Circle-6, Jaipur. 3. CIT(A). 4. CIT, 5. DR, ITAT, Jaipur 6. Guard File (ITA No. 183/JP/2016) By order, Assistant. Registrar 4 ITA No. 183/JP/2016 Goverdhan Prasad Singhal Goverdhan Prasad Singhal v. Asstt. Commissioner of Incometax, Circle-6, Jaipur