ORDER Akil Abdul Hamid Kureshi, J. 1. At the time of admission of the appeal, only Question No. 1 was framed for consideration of this Court: "Whether the ITAT was right in law and on facts in holding that deduction under Section 80HHC is to be calculated without excluding the profit of Daman Unit of the assessee on which 100% deduction allowed under Section 80IB?" 2. Learned Counsel for the Revenue correctly points out that in so far as this Court is concerned, such question came up for consideration in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax v. M/s. Atul Intermediates, [2015] 373 ITR 638 (Guj.), in which the following observations have been made: "30. We are unable to follow the line of logic adopted by the Bombay High Court in case of Associated Capsules P. Ltd. (supra) that section 80IA(9) of the Act in the context of section 80HHC would operate not at the stage of computation but at the stage of allowing the deduction. In plain terms sub-section (9) of section 80IA disentitles an assessee from claiming deduction under any other provision of sub-chapter C to the extent deduction is already claimed and allowed for certain profit or gain of an undertaking or enterprise under section 80IA. Such provision, therefore, would have to be applied at the very stage to assessee's claim for deduction under section 80HHC of the Act is considered. While computing such deduction the effect of sub-section (9) of section 80IA would have to be given. We do not think that in the process we are tinkering with the formula for computation of eligible profit for deduction under section 80HHC of the Act. We have noticed that different formulae have been provided for manufacturing exporter and trader and in case of an assessee whose exports comprise of both the sources. It is, therefore, at the stage of sub-section (3) of section 80HHC effect of sub-section (9) of section 80-IA would apply. It is true that clause (baa) to explanation to section 80HHCdefines a term 'profits of the business'. While working out the business profits as specified therein, in terms of sub-section (9) of section 80IA the profit or gain which had already been allowed deduction to the extent mentioned therein would have to be ignored. 31. This interpretation, which we have adopted, would not be disturbed by reference to section 80AB of the Act. While working out the business profits as specified therein, in terms of sub-section (9) of section 80IA the profit or gain which had already been allowed deduction to the extent mentioned therein would have to be ignored. 31. This interpretation, which we have adopted, would not be disturbed by reference to section 80AB of the Act. The said section only provides that while computing a deduction under any other provisions contained in sub-chapter C of Chapter VI in respect of any income specified in such section, then, notwithstanding anything contained in that section, for the purpose of computing deduction, the amount of income of that nature as computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act shall alone be deemed to be the amount of income of that nature, which is derived or received by the assess, and which is included in his gross total income. The non-obstante expression used in this section is notwithstanding contained in 'that section' namely, the section under which the claim of deduction is to be examined. By no means this provision of expression 'notwithstanding anything contained in that section' can be used to interpret that section 80HHC of the Act can have no effect of sub-section (9) of section 80IA. As noted earlier, if this were so, the second part of Sub-section (9) limiting the total deductions to the profit and gain from the eligible business also could not be applied. 32. In case of IPCA Laboratory Ltd. v. Deputy Commissioner of Income-Tax reported in 266 ITR 521 the Supreme Court observed as under: Section 80AB is also in Chapter VI-A. It starts with the words "where any deduction is required to be made or allowed under any Section of this Chapter". This would include Section 80HHC. Section 80AB further provides that "notwithstanding anything contained in that Section". Thus Section 80AB has been given an overriding effect over all other Sections in Chapter VIA. Section 80-HHC does not provide that its provisions are to prevail over Section 80AB or over any other provision of the Act. Section 80HHC would thus be governed by Section 80AB. Decisions of the Bombay High Court and the Kerala High Court to the contrary cannot be said to be the correct law. Section 80AB makes it clear that the computation of income has to be in accordance with the provisions of the Act. Section 80HHC would thus be governed by Section 80AB. Decisions of the Bombay High Court and the Kerala High Court to the contrary cannot be said to be the correct law. Section 80AB makes it clear that the computation of income has to be in accordance with the provisions of the Act. If the income has to be computed in accordance with the provisions of the Act, then not only profits but also losses have to be taken into consideration. In the result, we side with the view of Delhi High Court following by Kerala and Punjab and Haryana High Courts. The question is answered in favour of the Revenue. Tax appeal is allowed. Judgment of the Tribunal is reversed to that extent. Appeal is disposed of accordingly." 3. Under the circumstances, the question is answered in favour of the Revenue. 4. Tax appeal is allowed and disposed of accordingly.