1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
TaxTMI Login
🚀 New: Section-Wise Filter ✕
Just a moment...
1. Search Case laws by Section / Act / Rule — now available beyond Income Tax. GST and Other Laws Available
2. New: “In Favour Of” filter added in Case Laws.
Try both these filters in Case Laws →
Press 'Enter' to add multiple search terms. Rules for Better Search
---------------- For section wise search only -----------------
Accuracy Level ~ 90%
of 
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
No Folders have been created
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
NOTE:
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
All Case Laws
Note
Bookmark
Share
Don't have an account? Register Here
of Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
<h1>Mineral oil production-sharing contract profits and s.80-IB(9) deduction: 2009 Explanation held invalid, not retrospective, struck down</h1> The dominant issue was the constitutional validity and temporal operation of the Explanation inserted to s.80-IB(9) by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009, ... Deduction u/s 80IB - Petitioner is a foreign company based in Canada entered into what is known as 'Production Sharing Contract' (PSC) with the Government of India for exploration, development and production of 'mineral oil'Constitutional - validity of the amendment to sub-Section (9) of Section 80-IB and Explanation added to it under the Act by the Finance (No.2) Act, 2009 challenged - exploration, development and production of 'mineral oil' - HELD THAT:- Controversy involved in this petition is squarely covered by a Division Bench judgement of this Court in NIKO RESOURCES LIMITED [2015 (3) TMI 986 - GUJARAT HIGH COURT] as held Explanation added to Section 80-IB(9) by amendment is substantive law and could not apply retrospectively. The Explanation added to Section 80-IB(9) breaches the rule of law and is arbitrary being violative of Article 14 of the Constitution of India is struck down. Writ petitions succeed and are allowed. The Explanation to Section 80-IB(9) of the Act is held to be ultra vires to Article 14 of the Constitution of India. Rule is made absolute. Parties to bear their own costs. The petition was disposed of on the basis that the 'controversy involved in this petition is squarely covered by a Division Bench judgement' of the same Court in *NIKO RESOURCES LIMITED VS. UNION OF INDIA* (decision dated 26.3.2015). With consent of counsel, the Court applied the binding precedent without re-examining the merits, holding that the matter required no independent adjudication beyond adherence to the earlier ruling. Accordingly, 'this petition is allowed on the same terms and conditions as provided in the aforesaid judgement' in the *NIKO Resources* case, and 'Rule is made absolute accordingly.'
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
