Case LawHigh Court › The Commissioner Of The Income Tax v. M/...

The Commissioner Of The Income Tax v. M/S P&G Enterprises Private Limited

High Court 10 Jan 2018 In favour of: Unclear
Forum / Bench
High Court · dhcdb
Parties
The Commissioner Of The Income Tax v. M/S P&G Enterprises Private Limited
Date of order
10 Jan 2018
Assessment year(s)
2001-02
Outcome
Other

The order — as passed by the High Court

Case summary

In The Commissioner Of The Income Tax v. M/S P&G Enterprises Private Limited, the High Court (2018) decided the matter.

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

Sections referenced in this judgment

$~R-3 IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI+ ITA 433/2005 THE COMMISSIONER OF THE INCOME TAX..... Petitioner Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel. Through Mr. Zoheb Hossain, Sr. Standing Counsel. versus M/S P&G ENTERPRISES PRIVATE LIMITED ..... Respondent Through Ms. Nimisha Menon, Advocate. CORAM:HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SANJIV KHANNA HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE CHANDER SHEKHAR % O R D E R 10.01.2018 This appeal by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 in the case of P&G Enterprises Pvt. Ltd. relates to Assessment Year 2001-02 and arises from the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal in ITA No.3942/Del/2004. 2. The appeal was admitted vide order dated 13[th] July, 2005, on the following substantial questions of law:- “1)Whether the loss on exports is to be ignored at the time of calculating deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act? 2) Whether amount received from sale of DEPB receipts under section 28(iv) and „profit to the business‟ within the meaning of clause (baa) of the Explanation to Section 80HHC (4B) of the Act, 1961?” 3. Counsel for the parties are ad idem that the questions of law are covered by the decision of the Supreme Court in the case of IPCA Laboratories Ltd. Vs. DCIT, (2004) 266 ITR 521 and Tompam Exports Vs. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai, (2012) 3 SCC 593. 4. The Assessing Officer will accordingly re-compute the deduction under Section 80HHC applying the principles as laid down in the aforesaid decisions. 5. The questions of laws are accordingly answered without any order as to costs. SANJIV KHANNA, J. JANUARY 10, 2018 NA CHANDER SHEKHAR, 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