Weighted deduction claim fails where prior precedent is overruled and the expenditure falls outside the statutory scope.

Weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(b)(iii) was unavailable for expenditure on packing materials, lorry freight, harbour dues, steamer freight and related incidental costs. The packing materials claim had already been rejected by an earlier Madras HC decision, and the assessee's supporting precedent on the remaining items had been overruled by the Supreme Court. As the governing authority no longer supported the claim and the expenditure fell outside the allowable scope of the provision, the deduction was declined and the issue was answered against the assessee.

---

---

Issues: Whether the assessee was entitled to weighted deduction under section 35B(1)(b)(iii) of the Income-tax Act, 1961 in respect of expenditure on packing materials, lorry freight, harbour dues, steamer freight and other incidental expenses.

Analysis: The claim for weighted deduction on packing materials was already covered against the assessee by an earlier decision of the same Court. As regards the remaining expenditure, the earlier view relied upon by the assessee had been held to be incorrect and stood overruled by the Supreme Court, thereby settling the controversy.

Conclusion: The assessee was not entitled to weighted deduction on the disputed expenditure. The issue was answered against the assessee and in favour of the Revenue.

Final Conclusion: The references were answered by declining the assessee's claim for weighted deduction under the provision in question.

Ratio Decidendi: Where the relevant precedent has been overruled and the claim falls outside the allowable scope of weighted deduction, the deduction cannot be granted.

---