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

C/TAXAP/681/2019 ORDER IN THE HIGH COURT OF GUJARAT AT AHMEDABAD R/TAX APPEAL NO. 681 of 2019 ========================================================== THE PRINCIPAL COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-1 Versus ADANI PORTS AND SPECIAL ECONOMIC ZONE LTD. ========================================================== Appearance: MRS MAUNA M BHATT(174) for the Appellant(s) No. 1 MR B S SOPARKAR(6851) for the Opponent(s) No. 1 ========================================================== CORAM: HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI and HONOURABLE MS. JUSTICE SANGEETA K. VISHEN Date : 25/10/2019 ORAL ORDER (PER : HONOURABLE MS.JUSTICE HARSHA DEVANI) 1. 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. 2. 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 CO No.26/Ahd/2015 for assessment year 2010-11 by proposing the following two questions stated to be substantial questions of law: [A] “Whether Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts and circumstances in deleting the disallowance of Rs.19,79,54,135/- made by the Assessing Officer on Page 1 of 3

C/TAXAP/681/2019 ORDER account of interest income which is not eligible for deduction u/s.80IAB?” [B] “Whether Appellate Tribunal has erred in law and on facts in restricting the disallowance u/s.14A r w r 8D to Rs.1,33,91,149/- out of Rs.6,11,72,420/- without appreciating the finding of the Assessing Officer that certain amount of interest and administrative expenditure out of the total expenditure shown against the taxable income is actually incurred in relation to the exempt income?” 3. 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 rise to any question of law. 4. 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, 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 ground of appeal does not give rise to any question of law. Under the circumstances, for the reasons recorded in the above judgment and order, this ground of Page 2 of 3

C/TAXAP/681/2019 ORDER appeal also does not merit acceptance as the same does not give rise to any question of law. 5. For the foregoing reasons the appeal fails and is accordingly, summarily dismissed. (HARSHA DEVANI, J) (SANGEETA K. VISHEN, J) BINOY B PILLAI Page 3 of 3