2016 (9) TMI 1191

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....cate R & D expenditure for the purpose of determining profits of new industrial undertaking u/s. 80IB of the Act?" 3. To be herd with Tax Appeal No. 649 of 2016 and connected appeals. 4. We notice that the assessee had raised following additional questions for our consideration: "(i) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was right in law in upholding the action of the AO in reducing the brought forward depreciation of M.J.Pharmaceuticals Limited (MJPL) u/s. 72A of the Act while computing the profits of the business for the purpose of deduction u/s. 80HHC of the Act? (ii) Whether in the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is right in la....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....book profit under Section 115 JB for brought forward losses or unabsorbed depreciation of amalgamating company (Pradeep Drug Company Limited) amounting to Rs. 3,39,12,399/. He has further contended that the view taken by the AO and other authorities are required to be reversed. 3. On the other hand, learned Counsel for the department has contended that in view of the observations made by the tribunal in its order at paragraph No.3.2, this Court may not interfere with the said findings and appeal may be dismissed, which reads thus: "3.2 We have heard both the sides. At the outset, we have been informed that this issue has not been raised in the past in A.Y. 199900 and 200001. We have also been informed that the Assessee has....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....nal. We are in complete agreement with the view taken by the tribunal and while adopting the said reasonings, this appeal stands dismissed and question is answered in favour of the department and against the assessee." These questions are, therefore, also not entertained. 6. This leaves us with the sole surviving question of deduction under Section 80HHC to be worked out without giving effect to the provision of Section 80IA(9) of the Act. Admitted facts are that on identical issue, this Court has in case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Atul Intermediates reported in [2015] 373 ITR 638 held that nothing contained in Section 80HHC suggests that the deduction provided therein was immune from any outside influence that the provision was i....