RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. vs. THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX
What did the High Court hold?
The Delhi High Court held that the question of entitlement to deduction under Section 80IA on duty drawback and profit on sale of REP licences is virtually identical to a question previously considered in the context of Section 80IB in the case of CIT v. Dharampal Prem Chand Limited (ITA 1441/2006, decided on 27.11.2008). Following its own precedent in Dharampal Prem Chand, the Court answered the substantial question of law in favour of the assessee and against the revenue. Consequently, the impugned order of the ITAT to the extent it denied the deduction was set aside. The appeal was allowed to this extent. No issue was expressly left undecided.
What were the facts?
The assessee, Ranbaxy Laboratories Ltd., filed an appeal before the Delhi High Court against an order passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT). The appeal pertains to the assessment year(s) not specified in the judgment. The core issue revolves around the denial of deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on duty drawback and profit on sale of REP licences. The procedural history indicates that the ITAT had ruled against the assessee on this point, leading to the present appeal before the High Court. The amount in dispute is not explicitly stated.
What were the issues?
The Tribunal had to decide the following substantial question of law: 1. Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case, the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in denying deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, on duty drawback and profit on sale of REP licences? Assessee's Contention: The assessee argued that they are entitled to deduction under Section 80IA on duty drawback and profit on sale of REP licences. The judgment does not explicitly detail the assessee's arguments beyond this entitlement. Revenue's Contention: The judgment does not record any specific arguments made by the revenue in opposition to the assessee's claim for deduction under Section 80IA on the mentioned items.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI
Judgment delivered on: 11.12.2008
+ ITA 682/2007
RANBAXY LABORATORIES LTD. ... Appellant
- versus –
THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX NEW DELHI
... Respondent
Advocates who appeared in this case: For the Appellant : Mr Ajay Vohra with Ms Kavita Jha and Mr Sriram Krishna For the Respondent : Ms Rashmi Chopra
CORAM:- HON'BLE MR JUSTICE BADAR DURREZ AHMED HON’BLE MR JUSTICE RAJIV SHAKDHER
Whether Reporters of local papers may be allowed to see the judgment ?
To be referred to the Reporter or not ?
Whether the judgment should be reported in Digest ?
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J (ORAL) Admit. The following substantial question of law arises for the consideration of this Court:- (1) Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal erred in law in denying deduction under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961 on duty drawback and profit on sale of REP licences? 2008:DHC:3301-DB
We find that this question has been recently considered in the context of Section 80IB of the Income Tax Act in CIT v. Dharampal Prem Chand Limited: ITA 1441/2006 decided on 27.11.2008. We can dispose of this question straightaway. We find that the language employed in Section 80IA and 80IB, in the context of the question raised above, is virtually identical. Following the view that we have taken in Dharampal Prem Chand (supra), the question raised above, is answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue.
To that extent the impugned order is set aside. The appeal stands allowed to this extent.
BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J
RAJIV SHAKDHER, J December 11, 2008 SR
2008:DHC:3301-DB
More judgments on Section 80IA
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 964/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur… vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 963/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 964/AHD/2025[2018-19]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2018-19
- DCIT, Circle-4(1)(1), Ahmedabad, Vejalpur… vs Vijay M. Mistry Construction Private…ITA 963/AHD/2025[2017-18]Status: Disposed6 Oct 2026AY 2017-18
- Klsr Infratech Limited, Hyderabad vs DCIT, Central Circle-1(2), HyderabadITA 2323/HYD/2025[2016-17]Status: Disposed30 Sept 2026AY 2016-17
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Sh Umang Uniyal vs. Commissioner Department Of Central Goods And Services TaxUttarakhand · 16 Oct 2026
- Paresh Textiles Prop Paresh Gudhka vs. Superintendent Range Iv Div VBombay · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S Palladium Constructions PVT LTD. vs. Principal Commissioner Of Central TaxKarnataka · 15 Oct 2026
- M/S. Vk Construction vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - IiMadras · 15 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Sri Bhuvaneshwari And Co vs. The Deputy Commissioner (St)Madras · 15 Oct 2026