COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –IV vs. INFOGAIN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

PDF · subscribers
ITA/485/2014HC Delhi17 September 20153 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The Delhi High Court held that the issue was covered by its previous decisions in similar cases. The court found that Section 10A and Section 10B are pari materia, meaning they are substantially the same.

What were the facts?

The Revenue appealed against the ITAT's deletion of additions made on account of deduction claimed under Section 10B of the Income Tax Act. The assessee had also claimed deduction under Section 80HHE.

What were the issues?

Whether the ITAT erred in upholding the deletion of additions on account of Section 10B deduction when the assessee also claimed deduction under Section 80HHE.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 10B,Section 80HHE,Section 260A

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

ITA Nos. 485/2014 & 487/2014 Page 1 of 3

$~ * IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI 2 +

ITA 485/2014

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –IV ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Senior standing counsel with Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Junior Standing counsel.

versus

INFOGAIN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor with Mr. Sanat Kapoor and Mr. Shubham Rastogi, Advocates.

And 3 +

ITA 487/2014

COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX –IV ..... Appellant Through: Mr. Kamal Sawhney, Senior standing counsel with Mr. Raghvendra Singh, Junior Standing counsel.

versus

INFOGAIN INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED

..... Respondent Through: Mr. Salil Kapoor with Mr. Sanat Kapoor and Mr. Shubham Rastogi, Advocates.

CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU

O R D E R %

17.09.2015

This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:50

ITA Nos. 485/2014 & 487/2014 Page 2 of 3

1.

These appeals, being ITA No. 485 of 2014 and ITA No. 487 of 2014, by the Revenue under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (‘Act’) are directed against the impugned orders dated 29th November 2013 and 31st January 2014 passed by the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (‘ITAT’) in ITA Nos.2339/Del/2010 and 5720/Del/2010 for the Assessment Years 2005-06 and 2006-07 respectively.

2.

The issue that is urged for consideration is whether the ITAT has erred in upholding the deletion of the addition on account of the deduction claimed under section 10B of the Act amounting to Rs. 5,88,28,278 and Rs. 7,03,87,701 although the Respondent Assessee had been claiming deduction under Section 80HHE of the Act?

3.

It is not disputed that the above issue stands covered in favour of the Assessee and against the Revenue by the decisions of this Court in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Infra Soft Technologies Limited (decision dated 21st October 2010 in ITA No. 708 of 2008) and Commissioner of Income Tax v. Interra Software India Limited (2011) 238 CTR (Del) 23. In both decisions the deduction claimed was under Section 10A of the Act which is in pari materia Section 10B of the Act. This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:50

ITA Nos. 485/2014 & 487/2014 Page 3 of 3

4.

These appeals are accordingly dismissed.

S.MURALIDHAR, J

VIBHU BAKHRU, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 Rk This is a digitally signed order. The authenticity of the order can be re-verified from Delhi High Court Order Portal by scanning the QR code shown above. The Order is downloaded from the DHC Server on 04/04/2026 at 21:54:50

More judgments on Section 10B

All 1,217 judgments and leading authorities on Section 10B →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →