CIT v. K.G. Denim Ltd. - Taxpublishers.in

SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT


The Tax PublishersTax Case Appeal No. 145 of 2009 2009 TaxPub(DT) 1651 (Mad-HC) : (2009) 029 (I) ITCL 0288 : (2009) 180 TAXMAN 0590 CIT v. K.G. Denim Ltd. INCOME TAX ACT, 1961 Deduction under section 80HHC - Computation of Book Profit -Under section 115JA Assessee filed its return under section 115JA. It claimed that deduction under section 80HHC was to be computed with reference to book profit ascertained under section 115JA. AO accepted assessee claim and made assessment accordingly. CIT by invoking section 263, held that assessment made was prejudicial to interest of revenue on the ground that deduction under section 80HHC was to be allowed with reference to profits of business as defined in clause (baa) of Explanation to section 80HHC. *Held:* CIT order was set-aside on ground that when two views were possible and AO had taken one view with which CIT did not agree, hence, order passed by AO could not be held as an erroneous order prejudicial to interest of revenue. Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 80HHC, read with section 115JA A.Y. : 1998-99 Decision: In favour of revenue. Case Law Analysis:CIT v. Rajanikant Schnelder & Associates (P.) Ltd. [2008] 302 ITR 22 (Mad.) [Para 9] CIT v. K.G. Denim Ltd. SUBSCRIBE FOR FULL CONTENT

The Tax PublishersTax Case Appeal No. 145 of 2009
2009 TaxPub(DT) 1651 (Mad-HC) : (2009) 029 (I) ITCL 0288 : (2009) 180 TAXMAN 0590

CIT v. K.G. Denim Ltd.

INCOME TAX ACT, 1961

Deduction under section 80HHC - Computation of Book Profit -Under section 115JA

Assessee filed its return under section 115JA. It claimed that deduction under section 80HHC was to be computed with reference to book profit ascertained under section 115JA. AO accepted assessee claim and made assessment accordingly. CIT by invoking section 263, held that assessment made was prejudicial to interest of revenue on the ground that deduction under section 80HHC was to be allowed with reference to profits of business as defined in clause (baa) of Explanation to section 80HHC. Held: CIT order was set-aside on ground that when two views were possible and AO had taken one view with which CIT did not agree, hence, order passed by AO could not be held as an erroneous order prejudicial to interest of revenue.

Income-tax Act, 1961, Section 80HHC, read with section 115JA

A.Y. : 1998-99
Decision: In favour of revenue.

Case Law Analysis:CIT v. Rajanikant Schnelder & Associates (P.) Ltd. [2008] 302 ITR 22 (Mad.) [Para 9]

CIT v. K.G. Denim Ltd.