- (1.) This is an application for review of our order dated 12th August, 2011 by which we dismissed an appeal under Section 260A of the Income-tax Act, 1961 preferred by the applicant against an order dated June 23, 2004 passed by the Income-tax Appellate Tribunal, "C" Bench, Kolkata in Income-tax Appeal bearing ITA No.1220 (Cal) of 1997 for the Assessment Year 1991-92. In the said appeal, the following two questions arose for determination: "i) "Whether on a true and proper interpretation of section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 and in view of the undisputed position that the garden tea business and purchased tea for which separate accounts are maintained and profits are separately computed, the Tribunal was justified in law in holding that the deduction under the said Section was required to be computed by aggregating the profits, export turn over and total turn over of all the businesses and not separately with reference to the profits, export turnover and total turnover of each business? "ii) Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in upholding the determination of the deduction under Section 80HHC at Rs. 4,73,57,023/- as made by the Assessing Officer as against the appellant's claim of Rs.6,22,61,946/- in respect of the purchased tea business and Rs.26,56,930/- in respect of the garden tea business?" By our order sought to be reviewed, we answered both the questions in the affirmative and against the assessee by relying upon the principles laid down by the Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. Vs. Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Mumbai, 2004 AIR(SC) 3046, wherein the term "profit" in Section 80HHC, both in sub-section (1) and in 3 sub-section (3) was held to be a positive profit worked out after taking into consideration losses if any.
(2.) By relying upon the said decision, we overruled the contention of Dr. Pal, the learned Senior Advocate appearing on behalf of the appellant, that for the purpose of getting benefit of Section 80HHC of the Act, there may be separate calculation in respect of two different types of business of the assessee, because, in our opinion, without taking into consideration all the businesses of the assessee dealing with export, neither the export turnover nor the "positive profit" can be worked out.
(3.) Being dissatisfied, the assessee has come up with the present application for review.;