{"id":673,"date":"2010-09-09T06:30:52","date_gmt":"2010-09-09T06:30:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/www.itatonline.org\/info\/?p=673"},"modified":"2010-09-10T13:27:39","modified_gmt":"2010-09-10T13:27:39","slug":"s-80hhc-vs-115jb-ajanta-pharma-reversed-by-supreme-court","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/s-80hhc-vs-115jb-ajanta-pharma-reversed-by-supreme-court\/","title":{"rendered":"S. 80HHC vs. 115JB Ajanta Pharma Reversed By Supreme Court"},"content":{"rendered":"<p>In <strong><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/index.php\/cit-vs-ajanta-pharma-bombay-high-court\">CIT vs. Ajanta Pharma<\/a><\/strong> 318 ITR 252 the Bombay High Court held (reversing the Special Bench judgement in <strong>DCIT vs. Syncome Formulations<\/strong> 292 ITR (AT) 144)) that the &#8220;sunset clause&#8221; of s. 80HHC (1B) applies to s. 115JB as well. <\/p>\n<p>This judgement has been <strong><em>reversed<\/em><\/strong> by the Supreme Court today (9.9.2010). It has been held that MAT companies are not subject to the limitations of s. 80HHC (1B). <\/p>\n<div class=\"journal4\"><a href=\"https:\/\/bit.ly\/Ajanta_115JB\">The judgement is available here<\/a>.\n <\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"<p>In <strong><a href=\"http:\/\/itatonline.org\/archives\/index.php\/cit-vs-ajanta-pharma-bombay-high-court\">CIT vs. Ajanta Pharma<\/a><\/strong> 318 ITR 252 the Bombay High Court held (reversing the Special Bench judgement in DCIT vs. Syncome Formulations 292 ITR (AT) 144)) that the &#8220;sunset clause&#8221; of s. 80HHC (1B) applies to s. 115JB as well. This judgement has been <strong><em>reversed<\/em><\/strong> by the Supreme Court today (9.9.2010). It has been held that MAT companies are not subject to the limitations of s. 80HHC (1B)<\/p>\n<div class=\"read-more\"><a href=\"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/s-80hhc-vs-115jb-ajanta-pharma-reversed-by-supreme-court\/\">Read more &#8250;<\/a><\/div>\n<p><!-- end of .read-more --><\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_jetpack_newsletter_access":"","_jetpack_dont_email_post_to_subs":false,"_jetpack_newsletter_tier_id":0,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paywalled_content":false,"_jetpack_memberships_contains_paid_content":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[1,6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-673","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-all-information","category-supreme-courthigh-court-related"],"jetpack_featured_media_url":"","jetpack_sharing_enabled":true,"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/673","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=673"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/673\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=673"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=673"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/itatonline.org\/info\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=673"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}