COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-IV vs. INFOGAIN INDIA PVT. LTD.
What did the High Court hold?
The High Court held that the issue was covered by its previous decisions in similar cases involving deductions under Section 10A, which is in pari materia with Section 10B. Therefore, the ITAT's decision was upheld.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the ITAT's decision to uphold the deletion of additions made on account of deductions claimed under Section 10B of the Act. The assessee had claimed deductions under Section 80HHE.
What were the issues?
Whether the ITAT erred in allowing deductions under Section 10B when the assessee had claimed deductions under Section 80HHE, considering the similarity of Section 10A and 10B.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
7 * 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 y + 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. Saul Kapoor with Mr. Sanat Kapoor and Mr. Shubham Rastogi, Advocates. CORAM: HON'BLE DR. JUSTICE S.MURALIDHAR HON'BLE MR JUSTICE VIBHU BAKHRU ORDER % 17.09.2015 ITA Nos. 485/2014 & 487/2014 Page 1 of 3 Digitally Signed By:AMULYA Signature Not Verified
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 3lS 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. 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 lOB 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? 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 21" 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 inpari materia Section lOB of the Act. ITA Nos. 485/2014 & 487/2014 Page2of3
These appeals are accordingly dismissed. S.MURALIDHAR, J ~ - VIBHU BAKHRU, J SEPTEMBER 17, 2015 Rk ITA Nos. 485/2014 & 487/2014 Page 3 of 3
More judgments on Section 10B
- Brainbees Solutions Limited, Pune… vs Assistant Commissioner of Income Tax…ITTPA 1431/PUN/2026[2022-2023]Status: Disposed29 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- ACIT 15(1)(2), Mumbai vs Galaxy Surfactants Limited, MumbaiITA 6984/MUM/2025[2011-2012]Status: Disposed15 Sept 2026AY 2011-2012
- Ivl Dhunseri Petrochem Industries Pvt… vs D.C.I.T., Circle - 11(1), KolkataITTPA 4/KOL/2026[2022-2023]Status: Heard11 Sept 2026AY 2022-2023
- T vs Motor Co. Ltd., Chennaivs.DCIT, Corp…ITTPA 52/CHNY/2026[2022-23]Status: Disposed9 Sept 2026AY 2022-23
- Vrajlal Chanabhai Kachhadiya, Jamnagar vs ITO, Ward-2(6), JamnagarITA 847/RJT/2025[2010-11]Status: Disposed7 Sept 2026AY 2010-11
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- Piyush Shantilal Veera vs. State Of U.P.Allahabad · 23 Oct 2026
- Tvl. Pooja Shri Traders vs. The Deputy State Tax Officer - 1Madras · 23 Oct 2026
- Aashutosh vs. The State Of Madhy PradeshMadhya Pradesh · 23 Oct 2026
- M/S Barnala Steel Industries Private Limited vs. State Of Uttar Pradesh And 2 OthersAllahabad · 22 Oct 2026
- Skd Suppliers Private Limited vs. The Superintendent, Central CGST, Rishra Division, Range-Ii, And AnrCalcutta · 22 Oct 2026