9911796707
|
Home
Issues:
1. Whether relief under section 80J(1) should be allowed as a deduction against the total income consisting of capital gains. 2. Whether deduction by way of development rebate should be set off against income from capital gains in the first instance. Analysis: The High Court of Bombay considered a reference under section 256(1) of the Income-tax Act, 1961, regarding the allowance of relief under section 80J(1) and deduction by way of development rebate for an assessee, a company engaged in ship operations. The first issue revolved around whether the relief under section 80J(1) should be set off against the total income comprising capital gains. The court examined the provisions of sections 28, 29, 33, and 80J of the Act, emphasizing that total income encompasses all income from various sources. The court clarified that each head of income is distinct, and deductions are to be applied as per the specific provisions for each head before arriving at the total income. Therefore, the court rejected the argument that relief under section 80J(1) should be allowed against capital gains rather than business income. Regarding the second issue of setting off development rebate against income from capital gains, the court referred to the provisions of sections 28, 29, and 33 of the Act. It highlighted that development rebate is to be deducted as provided in section 29 while computing income from business under section 28, indicating that it should not be set off against capital gains. The court dismissed the contention that development rebate should be deducted from capital gains instead of business income, ruling in favor of the Revenue on this issue. The court also analyzed the language of section 80J, which clearly specifies that the deduction is allowed from profits and gains derived from an industrial undertaking. The court emphasized that the deduction under section 80J is to be applied from the profits and gains of the industrial undertaking, as mentioned in the section. Consequently, the court answered both questions in the negative and in favor of the Revenue, concluding that relief under section 80J(1) and development rebate should not be set off against capital gains but against the respective business income. The court made no order as to costs in this case.
|
