Home Case Index All Cases Income Tax Income Tax + HC Income Tax - 2021 (12) TMI HC This
Forgot password New User/ Regiser ⇒ Register to get Live Demo
2021 (12) TMI 728 - HC - Income TaxDeduction u/s 80IB in respect of “common expenses”of its Units at Pandicharry, Goa and Jammu - HELD THAT:- Tribunal followed the assessee’s own case for the assessment years, namely, 2000-01 and 2001-02 and allowed the deduction as claimed under Section 80IB of the Act. As against the said order of the Tribunal, the revenue preferred appeal before this Court and the appeal preferred by the revenue in . was dismissed by [2009 (11) TMI 1017 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] a judgement dated 20th November, 2009 on the ground of unexplained and inordinate delay. With regard to the assessment year 2002-03, the Tribunal granted relief to the assessee and the revenue carried the matter on appeal to this Court [2019 (9) TMI 1621 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] which was dismissed by judgement on the ground that no question of law arises for consideration. Thus, the decision rendered by the Tribunal does not call for any interference. Claim for deduction under Section 80IB on the sale of scrap - This issue is no longer res integra and there are several decisions which are in favour of the assessee and the Tribunal had followed the decision of this Court in the case of Reckitt Benckiser (India) Ltd. [2015 (2) TMI 506 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] and granted relief to the assessee. We find that the revenue has not made out any ground to interfere with the said finding rendered by the Tribunal which is taken note of the correct legal position. Disallowance u/s 14A r.w.r. 8D - there were borrowed capitals and investments out of such borrowed funds were also made in making investments that yielded exempt income - HELD THAT:- Tribunal granted relief taking note of the decision in favour of the assessee by placing reliance in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax, Central-I, Calcutta –vs- Ashish Jhunjhunwala [2015 (12) TMI 905 - CALCUTTA HIGH COURT] The said decision lays down the correct legal principle. Therefore, there is no error in the order passed by the Tribunal. Appeal decided against revenue.
|