Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2016 (7) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2016 (7) TMI 1239 - HC - Income TaxDeduction to the extent of actual payment to the ONGC - Held that:- The question in favour of the assessee, we are of the opinion that the Tribunal is justified in allowing deduction of payment to ONGC. See THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I Versus ALEMBIC GLASS INDUSTRIES LTD [2016 (12) TMI 790 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT]. Deduction u/s. 80-HHC - revenue has contended that the Tribunal has failed to appreciate that the amount of profit eligible for deduction under section 80-HHC of the Act is subject to the conditions specified in that section - Held that:- Considering the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Ajanta Pharma Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income-tax (2010 (9) TMI 8 - SUPREME COURT ) and the decision of this court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax v. Aarvee Denims & Exports Ltd., (2012 (9) TMI 1078 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT), we are of the opinion that the Tribunal has rightly allowed the claim of the assessee directing to reduce the deduction u/s. 80-HHC was to be computed based on book profit for the purpose of section 115JB Claim of deduction under section 80IA(4) - Held that:- Tribunal has rightly allowed the claim of the assessee.even in respect of electricity generation plant established by the assessee and the income derived from such enterprise of the assessee, it would have to be held that the assessee fully complied with the requirements prescribed under section 80-IA in order to avail the benefits provided therein. Therefore, the contention based on the interpretation of the expression `derived from’ could have no application to the case where the provisions of section 80-IA got attracted. MAT computation - Held that:- Provision for gratuity liability made on basis of actuarial valuation cannot be stated to be an uncertained liability so as to add it back in terms of clause (c) to Explanation (1) to section 115JB.” See Deputy Commissioner of Income-tax, Circle 1(2), Baroda vs. Inox Leisure Ltd., reported in [2013 (2) TMI 353 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT ]. As regards provision for diminution in value of investments under section 115JB is concerned, relying on the decision of the Apex Court in the case of Commissioner of Income-tax, Delhi v. HCL Comnet Systems & Services Ltd., [2008 (9) TMI 18 - SUPREME COURT] the claim is allowable.
|