2020 (6) TMI 724

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... ppellant : Mr.M.Vijayaraghavan for M/s.Subbaraya Aiyar Padmanabhan For the Respondent : Mr.M.Swaminathan, Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Ms.V.Pushpa Junior Standing Counsel JUDGMENT (Judgment of the Court was delivered by DR.VINEET KOTHARI, J) Both the learned counsel agree that the controversy in the present case is covered by the decision rendered by this Bench in Tax Case Appeal No.228 .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... A or 10B would be made while computing the gross total income of the eligible undertaking (like the Assessee) under Chapter IV of the Act and not at the stage of computation of the total income under Chapter VI of the Act. 28. Here in the case in hand, the total income was first arrived at by the Revenue through the Assessing Officer in the Assessment Order by computing the total income by way o .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

..... law having been declared by the Hon'ble Apex Court. Therefore, we are of the view that, the Substantial Question of Law raised in this Appeal is covered by the said decision, therefore it can be answered accordingly. 31. In the result, the Appeal is allowed and the Substantial Question of Law raised in this Appeal is answered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue. There shall be .....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

→ Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X