9911796707
TMI Blog2008 (6) TMI 178X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... EHTA J.- This appeal was admitted after formulating the following substantial question of law: "Whether, on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Tribunal ought to have allowed the section 80HHC relief in respect of the 'profits derived by the assessee from the export of goods' without reducing the said profits by the amount of carried forward depreciation and investment allowance?" ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... nfirmed the action of the Assessing Officer. In second appeal also, the assessee could not succeed. The Tribunal followed the decision of the apex court in the case of CIT v. Kotagiri Industrial Co-operative Tea Factory Ltd. [1997] 224 ITR 604 to hold that before allowing any deduction under Chapter VI-A of the Act, gross total income had to be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... n relation to working out the deductions under sections 80HH and 80-I of the Act-whether such deductions are allowable before setting off the business losses of earlier years or not. The Supreme Court has come to the conclusion that if the resultant figure, after setting off the business losses of earlier years, is nil, no deduction under sections 80HH and 80-I can be granted. 6. In the case of C ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... tion'. Thus, section 80AB has been given an overriding effect over all other sections in Chapter VI-A. Section 80HHC does not provide that its provisions are to prevail over section 80AB or over any other provisions of the Act. Section 80HHC would thus be governed by section 80AB. The decisions of the Bombay High Court and the Kerala High Court to the contrary cannot be said to be the correct law. ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
