IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 
 . 
         ITA 133/2006  
 . 
 COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX          ..... Appellant 
 Through       Ms. P.L.Bansal, Advocate 
 . 
 versus 
 . 
 M/S HIGH POLYMER LABS LTD.          ..... Respondent 
 Through       Mr. Badri Nath, Advocate 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 CORAM: 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MADAN B. LOKUR 
 HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIPIN SANGHI 
 O R D E R 
                               22.08.2006 
 In this appeal under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 the Revenue 
 has raised several questions. One of the questions that raised by the Revenue is 
 whether Excise Duty does not form a part of the total turn over for the purposes 
 of computing deductions under Section 80HHC of the Act. 
 Learned counsel for the Revenue fairly points out in ITA No. 331/2004, 
 (Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Rollatainers Ltd. decided on 12th July, 2004) 
 this Court has already declined to admit an appeal raising a similar question of 
 law. She also says that in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Chloride India Ltd., 
 [2002] 256 ITR 625 and Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Sudarshan Chemicals 
 Industries Ltd., [2000] 245 ITR 769, a view has been taken by the Calcutta High 
 Court and by the Mumbai High Court respectively in favour of the assessee and 
 against the Revenue. 
 Following the decisions in the aforesaid cases as well as the view 
 expressed by this Court in Rollatainers, we are of the view that so far as this 
 issue is concerned, the Revenue has not raised any substantial question of law. 
 However, the Revenue has raised two other substantial questions of law, 
 which fall for our consideration.  We admit this appeal in respect of those two 
 questions and formulate them as under :- 
 1) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that 
 the assessee  is entitled to reduce interest paid by it on bank overdrafts from 
 the interest received on FDRs while calculating deductions under Section 80HHC 
 read with Explanation (baa) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 
 . 
 2) Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was correct in law in holding that 
 profit from the sale of EDP receipts under the duty remission scheme cannot be 
 excluded from the profits of business as per Explanation (baa) for purposes of 
 computing the deductions under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. 
 . 
 . 
 Paper books be filed in accordance with the High Court Rules. 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 MADAN B. LOKUR, J 
 . 
 . 
 . 
 VIPIN SANGHI, J 
 AUGUST 22, 2006 
 mw