Legal Document View

Unlock Advanced Research with PRISMAI

- Know your Kanoon - Doc Gen Hub - Counter Argument - Case Predict AI - Talk with IK Doc - ...
Upgrade to Premium
[Cites 2, Cited by 0]

Bombay High Court

Commissioner Of Income Tax-3 vs Jewelex India Pvt. Ltd on 19 November, 2018

Bench: Akil Kureshi, M.S. Sanklecha

                                                                                                       13. os itxa 443-16.doc

R.M. AMBERKAR
     (Private Secretary)       
                                    IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY
                                                                          O.O.C.J.

                                             INCOME TAX APPEAL (IT) NO. 443 OF 2016


                                  Pr. Commissioner of Income Tax-3                            .. Appellant

                                                    Versus
                                  Jewelex India Pvt Ltd                                       .. Respondent

                                                            ...................
                                   Mr. Suresh Kumar for the Appellant
                                   Mr. Percy Pardiwala, Senior Counsel a/w Mr. Atul Jasani for the
                                    Respondent
                                                                       ...................

                                                               CORAM        : AKIL KURESHI &
                                                                                M.S. SANKLECHA, JJ.
                                                                DATE       :    NOVEMBER 19, 2018.

                                  P.C.:

1. The Income Tax Appeal is admitted for consideration of following substantial questions of law:-

"(i). Whether on the facts and circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that in spite 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?

1 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 23/11/2018 00:20:01 :::

13. os itxa 443-16.doc

(ii) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case and in law, the Tribunal was justified in holding that the assessee's 10A 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 10A units since due to the amendment in clause

(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 for A.Y. 2008-09 and 2009-10?"

2. To be heard with Income Tax Appeal No. 676 of 2013 and connected appeals.
[ M.S. SANKLECHA, J. ] [ AKIL KURESHI, J ] 2 of 2 ::: Uploaded on - 21/11/2018 ::: Downloaded on - 23/11/2018 00:20:01 :::