1 hvn IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION ORDINARY ORIGINAL CIVIL JURISDICTION INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2009 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2009 INCOME TAX APPEAL NO. 130 OF 2009 The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant The Commissioner of Income Tax ... Appellant Versus M/s. Halcyon Labs Pvt.Ltd. ... Respondent Mr.Suresh Kumar with Mr. P.S. Sahadevan for the Appellant. CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & CORAM: F.I. REBELLO, & R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. R.S. MOHITE, JJ. DATED: MARCH 03, 2009 DATED: MARCH 03, 2009 DATED: MARCH 03, 2009 P.C. P.C. P.C. . The Revenue is in appeal on the following questions : "(a) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case, the Hon’ble Tribunal are justified in law in allowing deduction of Rs.47,63,250/- in respect of bad debts by relying on the decision of Special Bench of the Tribunal in the case of M/s. Oman International Bank, 100 ITD 285(SB) even though the action initiated by the assessee against M/s. Shamrock Industrial Co.Ltd. and M/s. Dena Bank were pending at the close of F.Y. relevant to A.Y. 2000-01 and thus the debt was not in the nature of bad debt in the relevant A.Y. and could not be treated as bad debt as held by Karnataka High Court in the case of South 2 India Surgical Co.Ltd. Vs. ACIT 287 ITR 62 (Karnataka). (b) Whether on the facts and in the circumstances of the case , the Hon’ble Tribunal are justified in law in holding the amount of sundry balances written back amounting to Rs.5,41,497/- is eligible for deduction u/s. 80-IA of the Income Tax Act even though the same is not in the nature of income derived from industrial undertakings?" . In so far as question (a) is concerned, the same is covered by the judgment of this court in Star Chemicals followed by Director of Income Tax Versus Oman International Bank SAOG, in Income Tax Appeal No. 114 of 2009 decided on 9th February, 2001. Hence, there is no merit in the said question. . In so far as question (b) is concerned, the learned tribunal has recorded the following finding : "We have considered the submissions made by both the sides, material on record and orders of the authoritiesbelow.The Ld.Counsel for the Assessee has stated that the sundry balances, written back pertained to amounts debited by the assessee earlier 3 against the income of Industrial Undertaking, hence, in these circumstances, we are of the view that this should be treated as "Derived from Industrial Undertaking". Accordingly, we direct the A.O. to consider the same as eligible for deduction u/s. 30-IA/80-B. Accordingly, this ground of the assessee stands partly allowed. . Considering the finding, in our opinion, the question of law would not arise. . In the light of the above, appeal dismissed. (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (R.S. MOHITE, J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.) (F.I. REBELLO,J.)