THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 vs. ADANI PORTS AND SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD.

Heard Mrs. Mauna M. Bhatt, learned senior standing counsel for the appellant and Mr. S.N. Soparkar, Senior Advocate, learned counsel with Mr. B.S. Soparkar, learned advocate appearing on behalf of the respondent on caveat.

By this appeal under section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (hereinafter referred to as “the Act”), the appellant revenue has challenged the order dated 12.2.2019 made by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, Ahmedabad Bench 'D' (hereinafter referred to as “the Tribunal”) in ITA No.3481/Ahd/2014 for assessment year 2010-11 by proposing the following three questions, stated to be substantial questions of law: “[A] Whether Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on the facts and circumstances in upholding the decision of the CIT (A) who has directed to exclude the net interest C/TAXAP/680/2019 ORDER income while computing the deduction u/s. 80IB despite the fact that only income derived from the industrial undertaking is eligible for deduction and interest income cannot be netted off with the interest expenditure which was incurred for business? [B] Whether Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in allowing enhancement of deduction u/s 80IB by the amount of disallowance u/s 14A of the Act is not covered by CBDT circular 37/2016 and (ii) disallowance of expenditure u/s 14A is in relation to income does/shall not form part of total income and not related to business activity? [C] Whether Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in deleting the disallowance made by the Assessing Officer for the wrong claim made by the assessee u/s 80G in the ROI without appreciating the fact that the Assessing Officer has correctly allowed the eligible donations of Rs.6,70,525/- in proportion of the turnover and to that extent the deduction u/s 80IAB was reduced by Rs.6,69,880/- by the Assessing Officer?”

Insofar as proposed question [A] is concerned, it is an admitted position that the controversy raised by the said question stands concluded in favour of the assessee by a decision of this court rendered in Tax Appeal No.643 of 2017 in the assessee’s own case, wherein the court has placed reliance upon an earlier decision of this High Court in Commissioner of Income-tax v. Nirma Limited, [2014] 367 ITR 12 (Guj). Under the circumstances, for the reasons recorded in the above decisions, this ground of appeal cannot be said to give C/TAXAP/680/2019 ORDER rise to any question of law.

As regards proposed question [B] which relates to enhancement of deduction under section 80IAB of the Act by the amount of disallowance made under section 14A of the Act, and proposed question [C] which relates to the claim made by the assessee under section 80G of the Act, by a judgment and order of even date made in Tax Appeal No.678 of 2019 in the assessee’s own case, this court has held that the said grounds of appeal do not give rise to any question of law. Under the circumstances, for the reasons recorded in the above judgment and order, these ground of appeal also do not merit acceptance as the same do not give rise to any question of law.

For the foregoing reasons, the appeal fails and is, accordingly, summarily dismissed. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (SANGEETA K. VISHEN, J) BINOY B PILLAI