Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act

The decision most relied on for Section 80HHC is Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co. (67 ITR 11), cited in 321 of the 1,083 judgments on BharatTax that turn on this section.

Leading authorities on Section 80HHC

Additionally, in CIT v. A. Raman & Co.
67 ITR 11 · 1968 · Supreme Court
321
citing judgments

The mere lawful reorganization of a business transaction does not automatically imply an intent to evade tax, and genuine business adjustments should not be considered suppressive actions without clear evidence of such intent.

Bajaj Tempo Ltd. v. CIT
196 ITR 188 · 1992 · Supreme Court
289
citing judgments

Provisions in taxing statutes that grant incentives, concessions, or exemptions for promoting economic growth and industrialization must be interpreted liberally and purposively. Any restrictions placed on such provisions should also be construed reasonably to advance their objective, not frustrate it.

Velayudhaswamy Spinning Mills (P) Ltd. v. ACIT
340 ITR 477 · 2012 · High Court
213
citing judgments

If unabsorbed depreciation or losses from years prior to the initial assessment year for Section 80-IA claim have already been set off against other income, they cannot be notionally carried forward again to reduce the profits of the eligible unit for computing deduction under Section 80-IA. The notional carry forward provision under Section 80-IA(5) applies only to unabsorbed depreciation or losses that have not yet been absorbed.

CIT v. N.C. Budharaja & Co.
204 ITR 412 · 1993 · Supreme Court
164
citing judgments

The word 'production' has a wider connotation than 'manufacture'; every manufacture is production, but not every production amounts to manufacture. 'Production' includes bringing into existence new goods, by-products, or inter-products through a process, which may or may not be manufacture.

CIT v. Lakshmi Machine Works
290 ITR 667 · 2007 · Supreme Court
163
citing judgments

Excise duty collected by the assessee as an agent on behalf of the government is not includible in the total turnover for the purpose of computing deduction under section 80HHC.

Chowringhee Sales Bureau (P.) Ltd. v. CIT
87 ITR 542 · 1973 · Supreme Court
155
citing judgments

Indirect tax components, such as sales tax, are included when calculating gross turnover or sales receipts for determining business income. Deductions relating to these taxes are subject to the provisions of Section 43B, requiring actual payment for deductibility.

ACG Associated Capsules (P) Ltd. v. CIT
343 ITR 89 · 2012 · Supreme Court
144
citing judgments

For calculation of deduction under Section 80HHC, if total interest is netted off after adjusting interest paid and received, the 90% reduction specified in Explanation (baa) is not applicable.

CIT v. Asahi India Safety Glass Ltd.
346 ITR 329 · 2012 · High Court
129
citing judgments

Expenses incurred for software license purchase, development of miscellaneous software, and maintenance of websites are considered revenue in nature. Such expenses are deductible in the year they are incurred.

Topman Exports v. CIT
342 ITR 49 · 2012 · Supreme Court
121
citing judgments

Export incentives, such as DEPB (Duty Entitlement Pass Book) and advance license benefits, constitute income taxable on an accrual basis under Section 28 of the Income-tax Act. Profit arising on the transfer of DEPB is not eligible for deduction under Section 80HHC.

CIT v. K.V. Pilliah and Sons.
63 ITR 411 · 1967 · Supreme Court
97
citing judgments

The Income Tax Appellate Tribunal is not required to repeat its reasons when it fully agrees with the conclusions of the lower appellate authority and has no further grounds to add, even as the final fact-finding body.

Judgments on Section 80HHC

The Asstt. Commissioner of Income Tax, Vapi Circle, Vapi vs. M/S. Mitsu Limited, Daman

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 3510/AHD/2016[2000-01]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2000-01

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

M/S. Mitsu Private Limited, Vapi vs. The ACIT, Vapi Circle, Vapi

In the result, the appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 1000/AHD/2016[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Surat04 May 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Shri Sandip Gosain & Shri O. P. Meenav. ""यथ"/Respondent आ.अ.सं././././I "नधा"र अपीलाथ" Appellant S .T.A No. ण N वष"/A Y: 1 1671/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 2 1371/Ah 2002- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 03 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Co.No.1 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant 3 84/Ahd/ 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of 2006 Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 4 1672/Ah 2003- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2006 04 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 5 1764/Ah 2003- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2006 04 Commissioner Of 304/2, Iind Phase, Income Tax-Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Circle, Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q 6 1000/Ah 2002- M/S. Mitsu Limited, V. Assistant D/2016 03 304/2, Iind Phase, Commissioner Of Gidc, Vapi 396195 Income Tax-Vapi Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q Circle, Vapi 7 3510/Ah 2000- Assistant V. M/S. Mitsu Limited, D/2016 01 Commissioner Of Page 2 Of 83 Mitsu Ltd. V. Acit- Vapi/I.T.A. No.1671-1371,Co-184,1672-1764,1614 &1000/Ahd/2006/A.Y.02-03,03-04,06-07.02-03 Income Tax-Vapi 304/2, Iind Phase, Circle, Vapi Gidc, Vapi 396195 Pan: Aaccm 2764 Q

Section 143

ACIT 6(3), Mumbai vs. Glaxo Smithkline Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 3608/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Sri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 2548/Mum/2011 (यनधाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2002-03) Glaxosmithkline The Dy. Commissioner Of Pharmaceuticals Limited Income-Tax, Range 6(3), बनाम/ Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 030 Mumbai-400 020 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacg4414B आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita Nos. 3608 & 2261/Mum/2011 (यनधाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2002-03) The Dy. Commissioner Of Glaxosmithkline Income-Tax, Range 6(3), Pharmaceuticals Limited बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 030 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : S/Shri Rajan R. Vora, Nikhil Tiwari, Ars प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Anand Mohan, Cit Dr सुनवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2019 घोर्णा की िारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2020

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan R. VoraFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT DR
Section 4Section 80H

Glaxosmithkline Pharmaceuticals Limited, Mumbai vs. D.C.I.T. RG.6(3), Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2548/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Sri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 2548/Mum/2011 (यनधाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2002-03) Glaxosmithkline The Dy. Commissioner Of Pharmaceuticals Limited Income-Tax, Range 6(3), बनाम/ Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 030 Mumbai-400 020 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacg4414B आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita Nos. 3608 & 2261/Mum/2011 (यनधाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2002-03) The Dy. Commissioner Of Glaxosmithkline Income-Tax, Range 6(3), Pharmaceuticals Limited बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 030 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : S/Shri Rajan R. Vora, Nikhil Tiwari, Ars प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Anand Mohan, Cit Dr सुनवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2019 घोर्णा की िारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2020

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan R. VoraFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT DR
Section 4Section 80H

DCIT 6(3), Mumbai vs. Galxo Smithkine Pharmaceuticals Ltd, Mumbai

In the result, appeal is partly allowed for statistical purposes

ITA 2261/MUM/2011[2002-03]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai21 Feb 2020AY 2002-03

Bench: Sri Saktijit Dey, Jm & Sri Nk Pradhan, Am आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita No. 2548/Mum/2011 (यनधाारण वर्ा / Assessment Year 2002-03) Glaxosmithkline The Dy. Commissioner Of Pharmaceuticals Limited Income-Tax, Range 6(3), बनाम/ Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Vs. Mumbai-400 030 Mumbai-400 020 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) स्र्थायी लेखा सुं./Pan No. Aaacg4414B आयकर अपील सुं./ Ita Nos. 3608 & 2261/Mum/2011 (यनधाारण वर्ा / Assessment Years 2002-03) The Dy. Commissioner Of Glaxosmithkline Income-Tax, Range 6(3), Pharmaceuticals Limited बनाम/ Aayakar Bhavan, M.K. Marg, Dr. Annie Besant Road, Worli Vs. Mumbai-400 020 Mumbai-400 030 (अपीलार्थी / Appellant) (प्रत्यर्थी/ Respondent) अपीलार्थी की ओर से / Appellant By : S/Shri Rajan R. Vora, Nikhil Tiwari, Ars प्रत्यर्थी की ओर से / Respondent By : Shri Anand Mohan, Cit Dr सुनवाई की िारीख / Date Of Hearing: 26.11.2019 घोर्णा की िारीख / Date Of Pronouncement: 21.02.2020

For Appellant: S/Shri Rajan R. VoraFor Respondent: Shri Anand Mohan, CIT DR
Section 4Section 80H