K. Raviraja Pandian, J.@mdashIn this appeal the order of the Tribunal dated 3-7-2008 made in ITA No. 2262/Mad/2006 is questioned by the revenue by formulating the following substantial question of law:
Whether the Tribunal was right in upholding the order of the Commissioner (Appeals) wherein he has directed the assessing officer to compute the turnover/export turnover and profits of business of the granite division and not to consider the total turnover and profits relating to the other 2 units ?
2. The material facts culled out from the statement of facts are as follows:
The assessee is a registered partnership firm engaged in the business of manufacture and sale of O.K. sheet rolls, granite quarrying apart from running match factory. For the assessment year 2003-04 the assessee filed its return of income admitting total income of Rs. 18,46,679. The assessee has worked out the deduction u/s 80HHC by taking into account profits of business and turnover relating to standard granites alone, but the assessing officer worked out by adopting the total turnover of the entire business of the assessee as well as the profits of the assessees business and completed the assessment. The assessee carried the matter on appeal to the Commissioner (Appeals), who allowed the appeal and further directed the assessing officer to compute the deduction u/s 80HHC by considering the total turnover, export turnover and profits of the business of the granite division alone. This direction was affirmed by the Tribunal on appeal at the instance of the revenue. The correctness of the said order is canvassed in this appeal.
3. We have heard the argument of the learned Counsel appearing for the revenue and perused the material on record.
4. The learned Counsel appearing for the revenue submits that the issue is squarely covered against the revenue in the decisions rendered by the Division Bench of this Court in the cases of
In the light of the above decisions, we find no merit in this appeal. The appeal is dismissed.
