1990 (5) TMI 32

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... delivered by KIRPAL J.-The challenge in this writ petition is to the validity of section 80HHB of the Income-tax Act as being violative of articles 14 and 19(1) of the Constitution. The case was listed for hearing along with Income-tax References Nos. 110 to 112 of 1987 (Continental Construction Ltd. v. CIT [1990] 185 ITR 178 (Delhi)), wherein the question which arose was whether the petitioner .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... s is that the petitioner has not complied with the provisions of section 80HHB(3). According to the petitioner, the conditions prescribed under section 80HHB(3) were not complied with because till the introduction of section 80HHB in the Income-tax Act, the petitioner was getting the benefit of section 80-0 in terms of such types of agreements. The petitioner, therefore, did not create reserve acc .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ed before us by learned counsel for the Department. This being so, the Income-tax Department should not stand on mere technicalities and must give an opportunity to the petitioner to fulfil the requirements of section 80HHB(3) and, on such compliance within a reasonable time, it should grant the benefit to the petitioner under that provision. No serious contention was raised before us with regard .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X