9911796707
TMI Blog2016 (9) TMI 1191X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... ning profits of new industrial undertaking u/s. 80IB of the Act?" 3. To be herd with Tax Appeal No. 649 of 2016 and connected appeals. 4. We notice that the assessee had raised following additional questions for our consideration: "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in upholding the action of the AO in reducing the brought forward depreciation of M.J.Pharmaceuticals Limited (MJPL) u/s. 72A of the Act while computing the profits of the business for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in law in not allowing the deduction u/s. 115JB (2)(iii) of the Act bein ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... amalgamating company (Pradeep Drug Company Limited) amounting to Rs. 3,39,12,399/. He has further contended that the view taken by the AO and other authorities are required to be reversed. 3. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the department has contended that in view of the observations made by the tribunal in its order at paragraph No.3.2, this Court may not interfere with the said findings and appeal may be dismissed, which reads thus: "3.2 We have heard both the sides. At the outset, we have been informed that this issue has not been raised in the past in A.Y. 199900 and 200001. We have also been informed that the Assessee has moved an application u/s. 154 of IT Act. However that too was decided against the Assessee. We have exa ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... his appeal stands dismissed and question is answered in favour of the department and against the assessee." These questions are, therefore, also not entertained. 6. This leaves us with the sole surviving question of deduction under Section 80HHC to be worked out without giving effect to the provision of Section 80IA(9) of the Act. Admitted facts are that on identical issue, this Court has in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Atul Intermediates reported in [2015] 373 ITR 638 held that nothing contained in Section 80HHC suggests that the deduction provided therein was immune from any outside influence that the provision was impregnable by any other statute or enactment. Accepting any such theory would lead to incongruous results. It was ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... assessee, however, needs to be accepted. He submitted that the certificate in terms of Section 261 of the Income Tax Act may be granted with respect to this question. Section 261 of the Act which pertains to appeal to Supreme Court provides inter alia that an appeal to High Court shall lie from any judgement of the High Court, in any case which the High Court certifies to be fit one for appeal to the Supreme Court. In the present case, when we notice that different High Courts have taken different views, the Supreme Court has granted SLP, the appeal is pending hearing at the hands of larger bench on account of difference of opinion between the two learned Judges of the Bench, such a fitness certificate is required to be and is hereby grante ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
