Bombay High Court
The Pr. Commissioner Of Income Tax 9 vs Gebbs Healthcare Solutions P Ltd on 28 January, 2019
Author: Sandeep K. Shinde
Bench: Akil Kureshi, Sandeep K. Shinde
Priya Soparkar 1 43 itxa 1665-16-o
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION
INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.1665 OF 2016
The Pr.Commissioner of Income Tax-9 ... Appellant
V/s.
M/s Gebbs Healthcare Solutions P. Ltd. ... Respondent
---
Mr.Tejveer Singh for the Appellant.
Mr.Jas Sanghavi with Ms.Divyasha Mathur i/by M/s PDS Legal
for the Respondent.
---
CORAM : AKIL KURESHI AND
SANDEEP K. SHINDE, JJ.
DATE : JANUARY 28, 2019.
P.C.:-
1. Appeal is admitted for consideration of following substantial questions of law:
"(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in allowing the claim u/s 10B?
(b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that inspite of the omission of the words 10A and 10B in Explanation 1(f) and (ii) of Section 115JB by Finance Act, 2007 w.e.f. 1.4.2008, the assessee will not be liable for tax u/s.115JB of the Act as its Unit is in the Special Economic Zone and hence, its case is covered within the exemption provided in Clause (6) of Section 115JB of the Act?::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/01/2019 23:15:51 :::
Priya Soparkar 2 43 itxa 1665-16-o
(c) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee's 10B profit is not liable for tax u/s.115JB of the Act in view of clause (6) thereof, without appreciating that clause (6) has been inserted by the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 w.e.f. 10.02.2006 concurrently with the insertion of Section 10AA, also by the Special Economic Zones Act, 2005 w.e.f. 10.02.2006 and hence, clause (6) of section 115JB is applicable only to 10AA units and not to 10B units since due to the amendment in clauses (f) and (ii) of Explanation 1 of Section 115JB by Finance Act, 2007, profit/loss of 10A and 10B units has been expressly brought within the purview of MAT?"
2. We notice that the revenue has suggested one more question pertaining to applicability of Section 2(22)(e) of the Income Tax Act, 1961. Perusal of the judgment of the Tribunal would show that the amount involved in the present case is not large and further the Tribunal has focused on certain peculiar facts of the case. Under the circumstances, keeping the revenue's legal contentions open to be examined in appropriate case, the suggested question is not considered.
3. To be heard with Income Tax Appeal No.152 of of 2014. ::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/01/2019 23:15:51 :::
Priya Soparkar 3 43 itxa 1665-16-o
4. Learned counsel Mr.Jas Sanghavi waived notice.
5. Registry is directed to communicate a copy of this order to the Tribunal. This would enable the Tribunal to keep the papers and proceedings relating to the present appeal available, to be produced when sought for by the Court.
(SANDEEP K. SHINDE,J.) (AKIL KURESHI,J.) ....
::: Uploaded on - 30/01/2019 ::: Downloaded on - 30/01/2019 23:15:51 :::