P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT

284 ITR 548Supreme Court of India2006#3177 most cited

What is P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT authority for?

A Supreme Court decision in P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT approves the principle laid down in a Special Bench decision regarding the determination of eligible deductions, specifically approving a 'straight jacket formula' under subsection (3) for computing eligible business profits.

37

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 366,339 Indian tax judgments — from 2007 to 2025.

Also referred to as

P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT · section 10B · section 80-IA · eligible deduction · straight jacket formula · eligible business profit · Special Bench decision

Read the full judgment

Issues it is cited on

section 75section 10bainterest on outstanding receivablesinitial assessment yeartransfer pricing ordersection 80hsection 80hhcsection 10btested partysection 80hharms length pricesection 92b

Judgments citing P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT

DCIT, Circle-12(1), Kolkata vs. M/S Hindusthan Gum & Chemicals Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1601/KOL/2016[2010-2011]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2010-2011

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1410/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 7214 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1601 /Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata -Vs- Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 7214 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate Shri Vinod Sharma, Ca For The Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14A

…by the assessee, has dealt with similar issue. In those cases, the difference between the provisions of sections 10B and 80HH was noted and after considering the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sterling Foods (supra) and in P.R.Prabhakar versus CIT (284 ITR 548 (SC) ) approving the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in International Research Park Laboratories Limited versus Assistant C.I.T. (212 ITR (AT) 1 (SB) ), it was held that the profits of the business of the undertaking would include its entire business income. Keeping in view the above decision and the decision of the Tribunal, we are of the…

Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-12(1), Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee is partly allowed for statistical purposes and the appeal of the revenue is dismissed

ITA 1410/KOL/2016[2010-11]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata14 Feb 2018AY 2010-11

Bench: Hon’Ble Shri M.Balaganesh, Am & Shri S.S.Viswanethra Ravi, Jm] I.T.A No. 1410/Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd. -Vs- Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata [Pan: Aaach 7214 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) I.T.A No. 1601 /Kol/2016 Assessment Year : 2010-11 Dcit, Circle-12(1), Kolkata -Vs- Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd. [Pan: Aaach 7214 E] (Appellant) (Respondent) For The Appellant : Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. Advocate Shri Vinod Sharma, Ca For The Respondent : Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. Cit

For Appellant: Shri J.P. Khaitan, Sr. AdvocateFor Respondent: Shri Sallong Yaden, Addl. CIT
Section 10BSection 143(3)Section 14A

…by the assessee, has dealt with similar issue. In those cases, the difference between the provisions of sections 10B and 80HH was noted and after considering the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sterling Foods (supra) and in P.R.Prabhakar versus CIT (284 ITR 548 (SC) ) approving the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in International Research Park Laboratories Limited versus Assistant C.I.T. (212 ITR (AT) 1 (SB) ), it was held that the profits of the business of the undertaking would include its entire business income. Keeping in view the above decision and the decision of the Tribunal, we are of the…

Commissioner of Income Tax vs. M/S International Tractors Ltd

ITA/1082/2005HC Delhi20 Jul 2017

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 147Section 260ASection 80

…h those conditions of eligibility in the subsequent AYs, the deductions nevertheless should be allowed. 30. Pressing for a liberal construction of a beneficial provision, reliance was placed by Mr Vohra on the decision of P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC). He also relied on the principle of consistency and referred to the decision in Shasun Chemicals & Drugs Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 388 ITR 1 (SC) and the decision of this Court dated 11th January, 2011 in ITA No. 889/2009 (CIT v. Rajasthan Breweries Limited) which was upheld by the Supreme Court by dismissal of the Revenue’s Special Leave Peti…

Commissioner of Income Tax Delhi IV vs. International Tractors Ltd

ITA/690/2008HC Delhi20 Jul 2017

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 147Section 260ASection 80

…h those conditions of eligibility in the subsequent AYs, the deductions nevertheless should be allowed. 30. Pressing for a liberal construction of a beneficial provision, reliance was placed by Mr Vohra on the decision of P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC). He also relied on the principle of consistency and referred to the decision in Shasun Chemicals & Drugs Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 388 ITR 1 (SC) and the decision of this Court dated 11th January, 2011 in ITA No. 889/2009 (CIT v. Rajasthan Breweries Limited) which was upheld by the Supreme Court by dismissal of the Revenue’s Special Leave Peti…

Commissioner of Income Tax (Ltu) vs. International Tractors Limited

ITA/1189/2009HC Delhi20 Jul 2017

Bench: CASES PERTAINING TO SPL.DIVISION BENCHES

Section 147Section 260ASection 80

…h those conditions of eligibility in the subsequent AYs, the deductions nevertheless should be allowed. 30. Pressing for a liberal construction of a beneficial provision, reliance was placed by Mr Vohra on the decision of P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC). He also relied on the principle of consistency and referred to the decision in Shasun Chemicals & Drugs Ltd. v. CIT (2016) 388 ITR 1 (SC) and the decision of this Court dated 11th January, 2011 in ITA No. 889/2009 (CIT v. Rajasthan Breweries Limited) which was upheld by the Supreme Court by dismissal of the Revenue’s Special Leave Peti…

DCIT, Cir-12, Kolkata vs. M/S Hindustan Gums & Chemical Ltd., Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 752/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: S/Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. & Sanjay Bhaumik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Alam, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…by the assessee, has dealt with similar issue. In those cases, the difference between the provisions of sections 10B and 80HH was noted and after considering the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sterling Foods (supra) and in P.R.Prabhakar versus CIT (284 ITR 548 (SC) ) approving the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in International Research Park Laboratories Limited versus Assistant C.I.T. (212 ITR (AT) 1 (SB) ), it was held that the profits of the business of the undertaking would include its entire business income. Keeping in view the above decision and the decision of the Tribunal, we are of the…

Hindustan Gum & Chemicals Ltd., Kolkata vs. The DCIT, Cir-12, Kolkata

In the result, the appeal of the assessee in ITA No

ITA 462/KOL/2014[2008-2009]Status: DisposedITAT Kolkata08 Mar 2017AY 2008-2009

Bench: Shri M. Balaganesh, Am & Shri Partha Sarathi Chaudhury, Jm]

For Appellant: S/Shri J. P. Khaitan, Sr. Adv. & Sanjay Bhaumik, AdvFor Respondent: Shri S. S. Alam, JCIT, Sr. DR
Section 143(3)Section 43B

…by the assessee, has dealt with similar issue. In those cases, the difference between the provisions of sections 10B and 80HH was noted and after considering the judgments of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in Sterling Foods (supra) and in P.R.Prabhakar versus CIT (284 ITR 548 (SC) ) approving the Special Bench decision of the Tribunal in International Research Park Laboratories Limited versus Assistant C.I.T. (212 ITR (AT) 1 (SB) ), it was held that the profits of the business of the undertaking would include its entire business income. Keeping in view the above decision and the decision of the Tribunal, we are of the…

Addl CIT Cen Cir IX, Mumbai vs. Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed of in terms

ITA 8503/MUM/2010[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2016AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35E

…he amendment to section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, brought about by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, w.e.f. 1st April, 1992, is prospective in nature or is retrospective. This Court in the case of P.R. Prabhakar vs. CIT (2006) 204 CTR (SC) 27 : (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC), relying upon Circular No. 621, dt. 19th Dec., 1991 [(1992) 101 CTR (St) 1] issued by the CBDT, has held that the amendment in question is prospective in nature and the same is binding on the Revenue. In view of Circular No. 621, dt. 19th Dec., 1991 issued by the CBDT and the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the appeals were accepted an…

ACIT Cen Cir Cir-34, Mumbai vs. Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed of in terms

ITA 3859/MUM/2010[2006-07]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2016AY 2006-07

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35E

…he amendment to section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, brought about by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, w.e.f. 1st April, 1992, is prospective in nature or is retrospective. This Court in the case of P.R. Prabhakar vs. CIT (2006) 204 CTR (SC) 27 : (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC), relying upon Circular No. 621, dt. 19th Dec., 1991 [(1992) 101 CTR (St) 1] issued by the CBDT, has held that the amendment in question is prospective in nature and the same is binding on the Revenue. In view of Circular No. 621, dt. 19th Dec., 1991 issued by the CBDT and the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the appeals were accepted an…

DCIT Cen Cir 34, Mumbai vs. Prism Cement Ltd, Mumbai

Appeals are disposed of in terms

ITA 5751/MUM/2009[2005-06]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai16 May 2016AY 2005-06

Bench: Shri Joginder Singh & Shri Rajendra

Section 143(3)Section 147Section 35E

…he amendment to section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, brought about by the Finance (No. 2) Act, 1991, w.e.f. 1st April, 1992, is prospective in nature or is retrospective. This Court in the case of P.R. Prabhakar vs. CIT (2006) 204 CTR (SC) 27 : (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC), relying upon Circular No. 621, dt. 19th Dec., 1991 [(1992) 101 CTR (St) 1] issued by the CBDT, has held that the amendment in question is prospective in nature and the same is binding on the Revenue. In view of Circular No. 621, dt. 19th Dec., 1991 issued by the CBDT and the aforesaid judgment of this Court, the appeals were accepted an…

DCIT, New Delhi vs. M/S. Omaxe Buildhome (P) Ltd., New Delhi

ITA 5373/DEL/2013[2007-08]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi12 Nov 2015AY 2007-08

Bench: Shri I.C. Sudhir & Shri Laxmi Prasad Sahu Assessment Year : 2008-09 Deputy Cit, Vs. M/S. Omaxe Ltd., Central Circle-4, 7-Lsc, Omaxe House, New Delhi. Kalkaji, New Delhi. (Pan: Aaaco0171H) (Appellant) (Respondent) Assessment Year: 2008-09 M/S. Omaxe Ltd., Vs. Deputy Cit, 7-Lsc, Omaxe House, Central Circle-4, Kalkaji, New Delhi. New Delhi. (Pan: Aaaco0171H) (Appellant) (Respondent)

For Appellant: Shri Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Shri R.L. Meena, CIT(DR)
Section 10ISection 4Section 80I

…moting growth and development should be construed liberally and any restriction on it too has to be so construed so as to advance the objective of the provision and not to frustrate it [refer Bajaj Tempo Limited v. CIT 196 ITR 188 (SC), P.R. Prabhakar V. CIT: 284 ITR 548 (SC)]. 13.2 Without prejudice to the aforesaid submissions, the Learned AR submitted that one of the assessee’s subsidiary companies, M/s Navratan Techbuild (P) Ltd had also claimed deduction in respect of its project u/s 80IB(10) consisting of mainly housing sites. Deduction in that case was also disallowed by the Assessing Officer. Appeal was…

ACIT, Dehradun vs. M/S. Windlass Steel Craft, Dehradun

In the result, the appeal of the department is dismissed

ITA 5506/DEL/2012[2009-10]Status: DisposedITAT Delhi06 Nov 2015AY 2009-10

Bench: Sh. N. K. Saini, Am & Smt. Beena Pillai, Jm Ita No. 5506/Del/2012 : Asstt. Year : 2009-10 Asstt. Commissioner Of Income Tax, Vs M/S Windlass Steel Craft, Circle-1, 11-A, Rajpur Road, Dehradun Dehradun (Appellant) (Respondent) Pan No. Aaafw0958M Assessee By : Sh. Ashwani Kumar, Ca Revenue By : Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Sr. Dr Date Of Hearing : 30.09.2015 Date Of Pronouncement : 06.11.2015 Order Per N. K. Saini, Am:

For Appellant: Sh. Ashwani Kumar, CAFor Respondent: Sh. P. Dum Kanunjna, Sr. DR
Section 10BSection 80HSection 80I

…t. CIT (supra), after following the aforesaid circular, held that straightjacket formula given in sub-s. (3) has to be followed to determine the eligible deduction. The Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of P.R. Prabhakar Vs CIT (2006) 204 CTR (SC) 27 : (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC) had approved the principle laid down in the Special Bench decision in International Research Park Laboratories Vs CIT (supra). In the assessee’s own case the Tribunal in the preceding years, after considering the decision in the case of Liberty India (supra) held that provisions of s. 10B are different from 12 Windlass Steel Craft the provi…

M/S Grain Merchant Society, Tumkur vs. Income Tax Officer, Ward.2, Tumkur

In the result, the assessee's appeal for Assessment Year 2008-09 is allowed

ITA 1183/BANG/2014[2008-09]Status: DisposedITAT Bangalore10 Apr 2015AY 2008-09

Bench: Shri N.V. Vasudevan & Shri Jason P. Boaz

For Appellant: Shri S. Ramasubramanian, C.AFor Respondent: Dr.P.K. Srihari, Addl. CIT (D.R.)
Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 147Section 148Section 40Section 80Section 80P(2)Section 80P(2)(a)

…held as under :- “ 27. Besides the above, we also find substance in the argument of the learned counsel for the Assessee based on the decisions of the Hon’ble Supreme Court in the case of Mysodet (P) Ltd. Vs. CIT 305 ITR 276 (SC) and P.R. Prabhaukar Vs. CIT 284 ITR 548 (SC) that deduction u/s.80HHC of the Act is to be computed only with reference to the formula given in Sec.80HHC(3) of the Act and income computed under the head “Profits & Gains of Business or profession” should be adopted subject to Explanation (baa) to Sec.80HHC of the Act. 28. In the case of Mysodet (P) Ltd. (supra), the assessee was a limite…

Commissioner of Income Tax, Delhi vs. Commer. & Associates P.Ltd

ITA/69/2001HC Delhi07 Apr 2015

Bench: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE S. RAVINDRA BHAT,HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE R.K.GAUBA

Section 80Section 80H

…rokerage for procuring export orders for others is eligible for ITA 69/2001 Page 2 benefit under Section 80HHC(3) of the Income Tax Act. The said view has been in effect approved by the judgment of the Supreme Court in P.R. Prabhakar V. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 548 SC. Facts before the Supreme Court in P. R. Prabhakar are extracted below : “3. By reason of the impugned judgment, the High Court opined that income derived by the appellant towards commission/brokerage for procuring orders of export for others is not eligible to exemption from tax under section 80HHC of the Act. Referring to the circul…

Commr. of Income Tax vs. Research Park Lab. Ltd

ITR/16/2001HC Delhi06 Jan 2010
For Respondent: None
Section 80H

…er party in India will form part of profits eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC? It is not necessary for us to examine these questions in detail inasmuch as 2010:DHC:5-DB view of the Supreme Court decisions in the cases of P. R. Prabhakar v. CIT : (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC) and CIT v. Baby Marine Exports : (2007) 290 ITR 323 (SC). Consequently, both the questions referred to us in these references are decided against the revenue and in favour of the assessee, following the Supreme Court decision referred to above. The references stand answered accordingly. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J…

Commr. of Income Tax vs. Research Park Lab. Ltd

ITR/8/2001HC Delhi06 Jan 2010
For Respondent: None
Section 80H

…er party in India will form part of profits eligible for deduction u/s 80HHC? It is not necessary for us to examine these questions in detail inasmuch as 2010:DHC:4-DB view of the Supreme Court decisions in the cases of P. R. Prabhakar v. CIT : (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC) and CIT v. Baby Marine Exports : (2007) 290 ITR 323 (SC). Consequently, both the questions referred to us in these references are decided against the revenue and in favour of the assessee, following the Supreme Court decision referred to above. The references stand answered accordingly. BADAR DURREZ AHMED, J…

Commissioner of Income Tax-V N vs. Damanjit Singh

ITA/166/2000HC Delhi12 Jan 2007

…rom such commission was also profit derived from export since it ‘would not have come to the assessee had he not been engaged in the export business.’ This decision of the ITAT has been approved by the Hon’ble Supreme Court in P.R. Prabhakar v. CIT (2006) 284 ITR 548 (SC). This decision is, however, not immediately relevant for answering the issues that arise here. The non-Section 80HHC decisions 8. A large number of decisions were cited by both sides on the first issue concerning the nature of the interest income. These decisions can be classified into two broad categories: the non-Section 80HHC dec…