2019 (7) TMI 91

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Case Appeal has been admitted on the following substantial questions of law:- "(i) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the assessee is entitled to claim for deduction under Section 80IB of the Act when the profits are independently determinable for all the four units of the appellant and as a consequence relief should have been independently determined. (ii) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Tribunal was justified in denying relief under Section 80IB of the Act, when the appellant has satisfied all the conditions mentioned therein?" 3.We have heard Mr.P.J.Rishikesh, learned counsel for the appellant/assessee and Mr.T.R.Senthil Kumar, learned Senior Standing Counsel assisted by Mrs.K.G.Usha Rani for....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....Section 80A(2) of the Act nugatory and therefore the interpretation canvassed on behalf of the appellant cannot be accepted. 30. It is true that under Section 80-I(6) for the purpose of calculating the deduction, the loss sustained in one of the units, cannot be taken into account because Sub-Section 6 contemplates that only the profits shall be taken into account as if it was the only source of income. However, Section 80A(2) and Section 80B (5) are declaratory in nature. They apply to all the Sections falling in Chapter VI-A. They impose a ceiling on the total amount of deduction and therefore the non-obstante clause in Section 80-I(6) cannot restrict the operation of Sections 80A(2) and 80B(5) which operate in different spheres. 31. ....

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

Full Text of the Document

X X   X X   Extracts   X X   X X

....eals) on the above issue. The CIT(A) took note of the decision in the case of Synco Idustries (supra) and held that the methodology adopted by the Assessing Officer of aggregating the income of all the units before considering eligible deduction under Section 80 IB was not in order. 6. Identical issue came up for consideration before High Court of Delhi in the case of The Commissioner of Income Tax III Vs. Sona Koyo Steering Systems Limited in I.T.A.No.1279/2008 dated 10.02.2010, the Court after taking into consideration the decision in the case of Synco Industries Ltd., (Supra) and the decision in the case of Commissioner Income Tax Vs. Kotagiri Industrial Co-operative Tea Factory Ltd., reported in 224 ITR 605 held as follows: "From the....