1 IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUDICATURE AT BOMBAY O. O. C. J. INCOME TAX APPEAL NO.434 OF 2008 The Commissioner of Income Tax-3. ...Appellant. Vs. M/s.Syntex Corporation Ltd. ...Respondent. .... Mr. Vimal Gupta with Mr.Suresh Kumar for the Appellant. Mr.Satendrakumar Pandey i/b. Ms.Jyoti Dialani for the Respondent. ..... CORAM : DR.D.Y.CHANDRACHUD AND J.P.DEVADHAR, JJ. March 19, 2010. P.C. : The appeal was admitted by an order dated 6th February 2008, on the following two questions of law: “i) That whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally justified in confirming the reliefs allowed by the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) in respect of the addition made by the Assessing Officer under Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. And whether the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal was legally correct in confirming the direction of the Commissioner of Income Tax (Appeals) to the Assessing Officer to consider 90% of the net interest being difference of interest received minus interest paid for computing the deduction u/s.80 HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961? ii) Whether on a true construction of the explanation (baa) to Section 80HHC of the Income Tax Act, 1961, gross interest, to be deducted from export 2 profits or only net receipts of interest, if any, after taking into account the payments?” Counsel appearing on behalf of the Revenue and Counsel appearing on behalf of the Assessee agreed that both these questions would be covered in favour of the Revenue and against the Assessee by the judgment of this Court delivered today in CIT vs. Asian Star Co. Ltd. (Income Tax Appeal No.200 of 2009). The questions are accordingly answered in favour of the Revenue and against the assessee for the reasons stated in the judgment. The appeal is allowed. There shall be no order as to costs. ( Dr.D.Y.Chandrachud, J.) ( J.P.Devadhar, J.)