Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Mumb...

The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Mumbai v. M/S.mega Fine Pharma Private Limited

High Court 01 Jul 2011 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Mumbai v. M/S.mega Fine Pharma Private Limited
Date of order
01 Jul 2011
Assessment year(s)
Outcome
Other

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of Income Tax - 4, Mumbai v. M/S.mega Fine Pharma Private Limited, the High Court (2011) decided the matter.

Issue: 1.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing the deduction under Section 80IA / 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal.

Decision: 3.In this view of the matter, order dated 24th August 2007 passed by the Tribunal is quashed and set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Tribunal for consideration afresh.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

The order — as passed by the High Court

IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAYORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.420 OF 2010 The Commissioner of Income Tax - 4, Mumbai..Appellant. Versus M/s.Mega Fine Pharma Private Limited..Respondent. Mr.Vimal Gupta for the appellant.Mr.Paras Savla for the respondent. CORAM : J.P. Devadhar & Smt.R.P. Sondurbaldota, JJ. P.C. : DATE : 1[st] July, 2011. 1.Whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was justified in allowing the deduction under Section 80IA / 80IB of the Income Tax Act, 1961 is the question raised in this appeal. 2.Counsel for the parties state that the question raised in this appeal in respect of two issues namely duty drawback and DEPB are covered in favour of the Revenue by the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Liberty India Limited V/s. CIT reported in 317 ITR 218 (SC) and the third issue needs to be reconsidered in the light of the aforesaid judgment of the Apex Court. 3.In this view of the matter, order dated 24th August 2007 passed by the Tribunal is quashed and set aside and the matter is restored to the file of the Tribunal for consideration afresh. 4. The appeal is accordingly disposed off with no order as to costs. (Smt.R.P. Sondurbaldota, J.) (J.P. Devadhar, 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