2008 (6) TMI 231

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

.... after allowing deduction under s. 80HHC of the IT Act." 2. The assessee is engaged in the business of manufacture and export of cycle parts. The assessee was eligible to claim deduction under s. 80HHC as well as under s. 80-IB. The AO allowed deduction under s. 80HHC of Rs. 11,53,335. However, while allowing deduction under s. 80-IB, out of the business profit, deduction allowed under s. 80HHC was reduced and on the balance profit, deduction @ 25 per cent was allowed under s. 80-IB of the Act. 3. Learned CIT(A) held that deductions are independent to each other subject to upper limit which has been prescribed. He, therefore, held that deductions under ss. 80HHC and 80-IB are to be allowed from gross income and not net income claimed ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....sion of CIT vs. V. Chinnapandi (2006) 201 CTR (Mad) 13 : (2006) 282 ITR 389 (Mad), has decided the issue in favour of the assessee in T.C. No. 344 of 2004, wherein this Court has held as follows: '5. It is submitted across the Bar by the learned counsel appearing for either side that the very issue has been considered and held against the Revenue by the Madhya Pradesh High Court in the case of J.P. Tobacco Products (P) Ltd. vs. CIT (1997) 140 CTR (MP) 329 : (1998) 229 ITR 123 (MP). It has also been further submitted that the Bombay High Court also has taken the same view in the case of CIT vs. Nima Specific Family Trust (2001) 165 CTR (Bom) 518 : (2001) 248 ITR 29 (Bom). The judgI11ent of the Madhya Pradesh High Court has been taken to t....