2011 (2) TMI 269 - HC - Income Tax

Dis-allowed - Deduction u/s 80 HHC - The assessee is an exporter and claimed deduction - Learned counsel for the assessee fairly states that the view taken by the Tribunal is in consonance with the law laid down by the Hon ble Supreme Court in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax, Mumbai 2004 (3) TMI 9 - SUPREME Court and Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer, Income Tax, Mumbai 2008 (3) TMI 13 - Supreme court - Hence, the view taken by the Tribunal has to be upheld and the questions raised on behalf of the assessee have to be answered against it - Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed.

Summary

Issues:
1. Deduction u/s 80 HHC against current year export income
2. Priority of brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation set off compared to Section 80 HHC deduction for the current year
3. Interpretation of Section 80 HHC provision

Analysis:

Issue 1: Deduction u/s 80 HHC against current year export income
The appeal was filed under Section 260-A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 against the order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal regarding the deduction under Section 80 HHC. The Commissioner contended that the benefit of Section 80 HHC could not be granted by considering brought forward losses. The Tribunal upheld this view. The assessee, being an exporter, claimed the deduction under Section 80 HHC. The Tribunal's decision was supported by legal precedents such as IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax and Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer. Consequently, the Tribunal's decision was maintained, and the appeal was dismissed.

Issue 2: Priority of brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation set off
The second issue raised was the priority of setting off brought forward losses and unabsorbed depreciation compared to the deduction under Section 80 HHC for the current year. The Commissioner invoked jurisdiction under Section 263 of the Act based on this issue. The Tribunal's decision aligns with legal principles established by the Supreme Court, as cited in IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Dy. Commissioner of Income Tax and Synco Industries Ltd. v. Assessing Officer. The Tribunal's decision was upheld, emphasizing that the benefit of Section 80 HHC cannot be availed by considering brought forward losses.

Issue 3: Interpretation of Section 80 HHC provision
Lastly, the question of whether a liberal construction should be applied to interpret the provision of Section 80 HHC was raised. The Tribunal's decision, consistent with legal precedents, emphasized that the deduction under Section 80 HHC cannot be allowed against current year export income when considering brought forward losses. The Tribunal's decision was supported by legal authorities and upheld in this case.