TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
2021 (9) TMI 705
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....xcept for the appeal arising from assessment year 2003-04. 2. Since the questions raised in the appeals are elaborately worded, we deem it fit to re-frame the questions as follows: (i) Whether the computation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act is to be effected after reducing the amount allowed under section 80-IB and section 80-IA of the Act? (ii) Whether computation of deduction under section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act is to be done independently without restricting the quantum by reference to the provisions of section 80-IB or section 80-IA of the Act? (iii) Whether the activity of packing and sterilization of gloves purchased or produced by the appellant in non-sterilized form from the ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....sing officer granted the entire deduction claimed under section 80-IB and after computing the deduction allowable under section 80HHC, to be Rs. 1,15,70,866/-, reduced the deduction of Rs. 1,05,77,345/- allowed under section 80-IB and thus allowed a deduction of Rs. 9,93,521/- under section 80HHC. It was also factually found that no deduction under section 80JJAA was allowable in view of the statutory provisions. 6. On appeal filed by the assessee, the CIT (Appeals) held that the deduction under section 80HHC ought to be allowed only after reducing the amount allowed under section 80-IB from the eligible business profits. It was also held that the total deduction under Chapter VI-A could not exceed the gross total income in view of secti....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....arned counsel, the statute does not incorporate any prohibition in the grant of simultaneous deduction and on the other hand, the very intention behind providing different heads of deductions under the same Chapter was to give maximum benefit to the assessee. It was therefore submitted that since the decision in Olam Exports (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) case was wrongly decided, the same may require reconsideration. 11. Adv. Jose Joseph, learned Standing Counsel, on the other hand submitted that, this Court is bound by the decision in Olam Exports (India) Ltd. v. Commissioner of Income Tax (supra) and hence there was no requirement to defer the consideration of these appeals. He further submitted that these appeals ....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
....erstood that if an assessee is allowed a deduction under section 80-IA of the Act on the ground of it being an eligible business undertaking, it cannot be allowed a further deduction of the entire profits and gains claimed under the provisions of section 80HHC also. The provisions are explicit that if any deduction is claimed and allowed under section 80-IA as an eligible business, then the assessee cannot claim deduction to that extent of such profits and gains coming under other heads of deduction of Chapter VI-A of the Act. Section 80HHC which relates to deductions in respect of the profits and gains from export business falls under the heading "C" of Chapter VI-A. There is no ambiguity in section 80-IA(9) of the Act. We are of the opini....
X X X X Extracts X X X X
X X X X Extracts X X X X
.... the question, in that case, was whether the processing charges can be included in the total turnover while arriving at the export profits. 18. In the circumstances, we hold that the deduction under section 80HHC of the Act and the deduction under section 80-IB are not simultaneous. The deduction granted under section 80-IB has to be excluded while computing the deduction claimed under section 80HHC. The Tribunal was correct in its conclusion and the first two questions are answered in favour of the revenue. This appeal, therefore, stands dismissed. I.T.A. No. 368 of 2010 (arising from AY 2002-03) 19. This appeal arises from the assessment year 2002-03. Questions 1 and 2 mentioned at the beginning of this judgment arise for conside....