High CourtsDivision Bench(2008) 03 MAD CK 0166

Commissioner of Income Tax vs D. Raja alias Ilayaraja and Ilayaraja Multinational

Madras High Court · Decided on 18 March 2008 · Citation: (2009) 313 ITR 124

HON’BLE JUDGES
P.P.S. Janarathana Raja, J · K. Raviraja Pandian, J
RESULT
Dismissed
CASE NUMBER
T.C. (A) No''s. 160 to 166 and M.P. No. 1 of 2008

AI Structured Summary

Not yet generated for this judgment

Judgment

9 paragraphs · 257 words

P.P.S. Janarathana Raja, J.—These tax case appeals are filed u/s 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961, against the common order dated April 27, 2007, made in I.T.A. Nos. 1937, 1938/Mds/2000, I.T.A. Nos. 252, 1658 to 1661/Mds/2002. The relevant assessment years are 1992-93 to 1998-99. The abovesaid order is put in issue in these appeals by formulating the following substantial questions of law:

1.

Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right in holding that the claim of the assessee for deduction u/s 80HHC could be allowed in respect of export of prerecorded audio and video cassettes together with the right of exploitation?

2.

Whether, in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was right treating the export of pre-recorded audio and video cassettes together with the right of exploitation, as a sale of goods or merchandise eligible for the purpose of deduction u/s 80HHC?

2.

Learned Counsel for the appellant-Department fairly submits that the issue in these cases is covered against the Revenue by the following decisions:

(1) CIT v. R. Rajinikanth [2007] 295 ITR 523 (Mad);

(2) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. Superstar Music and Superstar Exports, ; and

(3) Commissioner of Income Tax Vs. V.C. Kuganathan, .

3.

Heard the learned Counsel and perused the above judgments.

4.

In the light of the above decisions, we are of the view that no substantial questions of law has arisen to warrant interference by this Court. The appeals are therefore dismissed. No costs. Consequently, connected miscellaneous petitions are closed.