The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Halcyon Labs Pvt.ltd
High Court
03 Mar 2009 In favour of: Revenue
Forum / Bench
High Court · newos
Parties
The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Halcyon Labs Pvt.ltd
Date of order
03 Mar 2009
Assessment year(s)
2000-01
Outcome
Allowed
Case summary
In The Commissioner Of Income Tax v. M/S. Halcyon Labs Pvt.ltd, the High Court (2009) allowed the appeal. The decision went in favour of the Revenue.
Issue: The Revenue is in appeal on the following questions : "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal are justified in law in allowing deduction of Rs.47,63,250/- in respect of bad debts by relying on the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M...
Decision: Accordingly, we direct the A.O. to consider the same as eligible for deduction u/s.
Summary auto-generated from the order below — read the full judgment for the complete reasoning.
The order — as passed by the High Court
1
hvn
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2009
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2009
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant
Versus
M/s. Halcyon Labs Pvt.Ltd. ... Respondent
Mr.Suresh Kumar with Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for the
Appellant.
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, &R.S. MOHITE, JJ.
CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, &
R.S. MOHITE, JJ.
DATED: MARCH 03, 2009
DATED: MARCH 03, 2009
DATED: MARCH 03, 2009
P.C.
P.C.
. The Revenue is in appeal on the following
questions :
"(a) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble
Tribunal are justified in law in allowing
deduction of Rs.47,63,250/- in respect of
bad debts by relying on the decision of
Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of
M/s. Oman International Bank, 100 ITD
285(SB) even though the action initiated by
the assessee against M/s. Shamrock
Industrial Co.Ltd. and M/s. Dena Bank were
pending at the close of F.Y. relevant to
A.Y. 2000-01 and thus the debt was not in
the nature of bad debt in the relevant A.Y.
and could not be treated as bad debt as held
by Karnataka High Court in the case of South
2
India Surgical Co.Ltd. Vs. ACIT 287 ITR 62
(Karnataka).
(b) Whether on the facts and in the
circumstances of the case , the Hon’ble
Tribunal are justified in law in holding the
amount of sundry balances written back
amounting to Rs.5,41,497/- is eligible for
deduction u/s. 80-IA of the Income Tax Act
even though the same is not in the nature of
income derived from industrial
undertakings?"
. In so far as question (a) is concerned, the same
is covered by the judgment of this court in Star
Chemicals followed by Director of Income Tax Versus
Oman International Bank SAOG, in Income Tax Appeal
No. 114 of 2009 decided on 9th February, 2001.
Hence, there is no merit in the said question.
. In so far as question (b) is concerned, the
learned tribunal has recorded the following finding
:
"We have considered the submissions made by
both the sides, material on record and
orders of the authoritiesbelow.The
Ld.Counsel for the Assessee has stated that
the sundry balances, written back pertained
to amounts debited by the assessee earlier
3
against the income of Industrial
Undertaking, hence, in these circumstances,
we are of the view that this should be
treated as "Derived from Industrial
Undertaking". Accordingly, we direct the
A.O. to consider the same as eligible for
deduction u/s. 30-IA/80-B. Accordingly,
this ground of the assessee stands partly
allowed.
. Considering the finding, in our opinion, the
question of law would not arise.
. In the light of the above, appeal dismissed.
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)(F.I. REBELLO,J.)
(R.S. MOHITE, J.)
(F.I. REBELLO,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.