THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-III, HYDERABAD vs. M/S VST INDUSTIRES LTD, AZAMABAD, HYDERABAD
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal held that Sales Tax and Excise Duty do not form part of the turnover. Therefore, they are not includable in the turnover for the purpose of deduction under Section 80HHC of the Act.
What were the facts?
The Revenue appealed against the decision regarding the deduction under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act. The core issue was whether Sales Tax and Excise Duty should be included in the 'Total Turnover' for the purpose of this deduction.
What were the issues?
Whether Sales Tax and Excise Duty are includable in 'Total Turnover' for calculating deduction under Section 80HHC.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
Cases cited in this judgment(1)Show listHide list
Detected automatically from the text. Citations are also linked where they appear in the judgment. The count shows how many other judgments on BharatTax rely on the same authority.
- CIT v. Lakshmi Machine Works163 citing290 ITR 667 · 2007 · SC · Read judgment
THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY AND THE HON’BLE SRI JUSTICE M.S.K. JAISWAL
I.T.T.A. No.160 OF 2006
DATED:27-12-2017
Between:
The Commissioner of Income Tax-III Hyderabad
… Appellant
And
M/s. VST Industries Ltd. Hyderabad … Respondent
COUNSEL FOR THE APPELLANT: Mr. B. Narasimha Sharma, Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department
COUNSEL FOR THE RESPONDENT: Mr. P. Rajendra Reddy
THE COURT MADE THE FOLLOWING:
CVNR, J & MSKJ, J ITTA 160/2006 2 JUDGMENT: (per the Hon’ble Sri Justice C.V. Nagarjuna Reddy)
The main question of law raised in this appeal by the Revenue is whether Sales Tax and Excise Duty are part of “Total Turnover” for the purpose of deduction under Section 80 HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961 (for short, ‘the Act’), and liable to be excluded from the said turnover for the purpose of deduction under the said provision. 2. At the hearing, Sri B. Narasimha Sarma, learned Senior Standing Counsel for Income Tax Department, has fairly submitted that in Commissioner of Income Tax v. Lakshmi Machine Works1, the Supreme Court held that Excise Duty and Sales Tax do not partake the character of turnover and therefore they are not includable in the turnover under Section 80HHC(3) of the Act. 3. In the light of the said judgment, the substantial questions of law framed in this appeal are answered against the Revenue. The appeal is accordingly dismissed.
__________________________ C.V. NAGARJUNA REDDY, J
_________________________ M.S.K. JAISWAL, J 27-12-2017 bnr
1 (2007) 290 ITR 667 (SC)
CVNR, J & MSKJ, J ITTA 160/2006 3
More judgments on Section 80HHC
- Sheena Industries, Panipat vs ACIT Circle, PanipatITA 3076/DEL/2008[2004-2005]Status: Disposed26 May 2026AY 2004-2005
- Sarla Fashion Garments, New Delhi vs JCIT, Range-31, DelhiITA 1799/DEL/2006[2001-2002]Status: Disposed20 May 2026AY 2001-2002
- M/S Vardhman Textiles Ltd vs C I T and AnrITA/517/200826 Feb 2026
- C I T vs M/S Glaxo Smithkline Consumer Helathcare LtdITA/271/20095 Feb 2026
- CIT, Chandigarh vs M/S Hindustan Unilever LtdITA/677/20085 Feb 2026
Recent GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S. Rohit Medical Systems vs. Commissioner Of Delhi Goods And Services Tax And Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Manoj Kumar Prop M K Steel Traders vs. Additional Commissioner, Central Goods And Services Tax & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Shivam Kumar vs. The State Of BiharPatna · 28 Oct 2026
- M/S Rajkalpana Travels PVT. LTD. vs. Commissioner CGST, Delhi North CommissionerateDelhi · 28 Oct 2026
- Mahaveer Ispat Traders vs. Principal Commissioner Dgst Delhi Department Of Trade And Taxes Gnctd & Anr.Delhi · 28 Oct 2026