Case LawHigh Court › Tarak Chemicals P. Ltd. Mumbai v. The As...

Tarak Chemicals P. Ltd. Mumbai v. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Range-2(3

High Court 14 Oct 2011 In favour of: Assessee
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
Tarak Chemicals P. Ltd. Mumbai v. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Range-2(3
Date of order
14 Oct 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Allowed

Case summary

In Tarak Chemicals P. Ltd. Mumbai v. The Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax Range-2(3, the High Court (2011) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the assessee.

Issue: Admit on the following question of law: Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Appellant was not entitled to reduce the amount of Rs.47,37,055/-, being the amount of eligible deduction computed under sub section (3) and (3A)...

Decision: Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed by answering the question in favour of the Assessee.

Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.

The order — as passed by the High Court

K IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.4094 OF 2010 Tarak Chemicals P. Ltd. Mumbai .. Appellant Vs. The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax Range-2(3).. Respondent. Mr. Sameer G. Dalal for the Appellant. Mr. Vimal Gupta for the Respondent. CORAM: J.P. DEVADHAR & K.K. TATED, JJ.DATE: 14TH OCTOBER, 2011. P.C. 1Heard. Admit on the following question of law: Whether, in the facts and in the circumstances of the case, and in law, the Tribunal was right in holding that the Appellant was not entitled to reduce the amount of Rs.47,37,055/-, being the amount of eligible deduction computed under sub section (3) and (3A) of section 80 HHC of the Act, from the book profit as computed under the provisions of section 115 JB of the Income Tax Act, 1961? 2Counsel for the parties state that said question is answered in favour of the Assessee by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. vs. Commissioner of Income Tax reported in [2010] 327 ITR 305 (SC). Accordingly, the Appeal is allowed by answering the question in favour of the Assessee. (J.P. DEVADHAR, J.) (K.K. TATED, J.)
Facing a similar income-tax issue?
Our CA-led litigation team handles notices, scrutiny, penalties and appeals (CIT(A) & ITAT) end-to-end.
✅ File an income-tax appeal (CIT(A)/ITAT) → 💬 Ask our CA
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.
Contact Careers Media / Press · Privacy Terms Refund Cancellation Cookies Disclaimer
© 2026 EaseValue Advisors LLP · LLPIN ACN-4920 · Jaipur, Rajasthan