In M/S.mega Fine Pharma Private Limited v. Dy. Commissioner Of Income Tax, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.603 OF 2009
M/s.Mega Fine Pharma Private Limited
Versus
Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax
..Appellant.
..Respondent.
Mr.P.K. Shivram with Mr.Paras Savla for the appellant.Mr.P.S. Sahadevan for the respondent.
CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &
Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar, JJ.
P.C. :
DATE : 11[th] January, 2011.
1.This appeal was admitted on 28[th] April 2009 on the following
substantial questions of law.
a)Whether deduction as computed under Section 80IB should be reduced from the deduction computed under Section 80HHC ?
b)Whether the deduction as computed under Section 80IB should be reduced from the eligible profit and gains of business before deduction under Section 80HHC can be computed ?
c)Whether Section 80HHC is a separate code within itself and deduction worked out as per the provisions of Section 80HHC itself and that nothing contained in clause (9) of section 80IA can be read to amend the provisions of Section 80HHC ?
questions of law has already been answered by this Court in the case of
Associated Capsules Private Limited V/s. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax (Income Tax Appeal No.3036 of 2010) decided on 10th January 2011 in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue.
3.The Appeal is disposed off accordingly with a direction to the Tribunal to re-compute the deduction in the light of aforesaid decision of this Court. No order as to costs.
(Mrs.Mridula Bhatkar, J.)
(J.P. Devadhar, J.)
This page reproduces a public-domain court order (Section 52(1)(q)(iv), Copyright Act 1957). Explanations are EaseValue's original analysis. Always read the original order.
Disclaimer: General information only — not legal, tax or professional advice, and no advocate/CA–client relationship is created. AI-generated summaries may contain errors and must be verified against the original court order. EaseValue accepts no liability for reliance on this content. Not a solicitation.
Full disclaimer & Terms.