M/S.nicomet Industries Limited, Mumbai v. Income-Tax Officer 8(2)-3, Mumbai & Others

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1639 OF 2010 M/s.Nicomet Industries Limited, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus Income-tax Officer 8(2)-3, Mumbai & Others..Respondents. Mr.Ajay R Singh for the appellant.Mr.Suresh Kumar for the respondents. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar &M.S. Sanklecha, JJ. DATE : 5[th] February 2013 P.C. : 1.This appeal was admitted on 18[th] October 2010 on the following substantial questions of law. “a)Whether on facts and in law, the assessee, while computing book profits under Section 115JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961, is entitled to reduce the net profit as per Profit & Loss A/c. By – (i) the deduction admissible under Section 80HHC actually computed under clause (a), (b) or (c) of sub-section (3) or sub-section 3A based on the gross total income OR (ii) the profits eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC computed with reference to book profits (after adjustments) in the manner specified in sub-section (3) or sub-section (3A) of Section 80HHC ? b)Whether on the facts and in law, the restriction provided in Section 80HHC 91B) can be extended to computation of book profits under Section 115JB even though no such corresponding amendment has been c)Whether the Tribunal was justified in law in disallowing the sum of Rs.8,36,953/- under Section 36(1)(va) read with Section 2(24)(x) of the Act being employees contribution to Provident Fund account and ESIC paid before due date for filing the income tax return ?” 2.In so far as questions (a) and (b) are concerned, counsel for the parties state that the both issues are covered by the decision of this Court in the matter of Commissioner of Income Tax V/s. Bhari Information Technical Systems P Limited reported in (2012) 340 ITR 593 (S.C.) in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue. In view of the above, we do not entertain questions (a) and (b). 3.In so far as question (c) is concerned, by consent of both the parties the decision of the Tribunal to the extent it deals with question (c) is set aside and the matter is restored to the Tribunal to decide the issue afresh in accordance with law. All contentions of both the parties are kept open. 4.The appeal is disposed of in above terms with no order as to costs. (M.S. Sanklecha, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, J.)