THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, vs. SOUTH INDIA CORPORATION LTD.

PDF · subscribers
ITA/386/2010HC KeralaKLHC01027078201025 January 2019Author: HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN,HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON4 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the High Court hold?

The High Court held that the appeal filed by the Revenue is to be rejected. The court reasoned that the primary issue regarding the assessee's eligibility for investment benefits under Section 80IA for its wind mills had already been decided in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue in a previous judgment (ITA Nos. 74 and 75 of 2008, dated January 7, 2019). Consequently, the present appeal, which raises the same core question, is dismissed. The court also noted that the second issue concerning the applicability of Section 263 against a Section 80IA claim did not require an answer, as the foundational issue on which Section 263 was invoked had been resolved in favour of the assessee. The operative direction is the rejection of the Revenue's appeal, upholding the order of the Tribunal.

What were the facts?

This appeal by the Revenue challenges an order of the Income Tax Appellate Tribunal (ITAT), Cochin Bench, dated June 18, 2010. The core dispute concerns the assessee, South India Corporation Ltd., and its eligibility to claim investment benefits under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, for wind mills established by it. The Revenue's appeal stems from the ITAT's decision which upheld the assessee's claim. The High Court notes that a similar issue concerning Section 80IA eligibility for wind mills was previously decided by the same court in favour of the assessee and against the Revenue in ITA Nos. 74 and 75 of 2008 by a judgment dated January 7, 2019. The present appeal is therefore being disposed of based on that prior ruling.

What were the issues?

1. Whether the assessee, South India Corporation Ltd., is eligible to claim investment benefits under Section 80IA of the Income Tax Act, 1961, with respect to the wind mills established by it? The Revenue contends that the assessee is not entitled to the deduction. The Assessee argues for its eligibility. 2. Whether Section 263 of the Income Tax Act, 1961, would lie against a claim allowed under Section 80IA? The Revenue had invoked Section 263. The High Court notes that this question need not be answered as the primary issue regarding Section 80IA eligibility has already been decided in favour of the assessee.

Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?

Section 80IA,Section 263

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Cause title — parties, addresses and appearances
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM PRESENT THE HONOURABLE MR.JUSTICE K.VINOD CHANDRAN & THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE ASHOK MENON FRIDAY ,THE 25TH DAY OF JANUARY 2019 / 5TH MAGHA, 1940 ITA.No. 386 of 2010 AGAINST THE ORDER/JUDGMENT IN ITA 127/2009 of I.T.A.TRIBUNAL,COCHIN BENCH DATED 18-06-2010 APPELLANT/S: THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX-I, COCHIN. BY ADVS. SRI.P.K.RAVINDRANATHA MENON (SR.) SRI.JOSE JOSEPH SC FOR INCOME TAX RESPONDENT/S: SOUTH INDIA CORPORATION LTD. RANI MEYYAMMAI BUILDINGS,WILLINGTON ISLAND, KOCHI-3. BY ADVS. SRI.K.ANAND (SR.) SMT.LATHA ANAND S.SRIDHAR THIS INCOME TAX APPEAL HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD ON 25.01.2019, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED THE FOLLOWING: ITA No.386/2010 2

J U D G M E N T Vinod Chandran, J This appeal is with respect to the assessee's eligibility to claim investment under Section 80IA with respect to the wind mills established by the assessee. The issue has already been considered by us and answered in favour of the assessee and against the revenue in ITA Nos.74 and 75/2008 by judgment dated 07.01.2019. Here the assessee's contentions were upheld by the Tribunal and the appeal is filed by the Revenue. Having already found the question raised in favour of the assessee and against the revenue, we reject the appeal answering the question in favour of the assessee upholding the order of the Tribunal. There is also another question as to whether Section 263 would lie as against the claim allowed under Section 80IA. We need not answer that question since the issue on which the Commissioner invoked Section 263 has already been answered in favour of the assessee.

The appeal would stand rejected. K. Vinod Chandran, Judge Ashok Menon, Judge jma

Appendix — schedule of exhibits
APPENDIX PETITIONER'S/S EXHIBITS: ANNEXURE-A COPY OF ASSESSMENT ORDER 143(3) DATED 28/12/2007 FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2005-06. ANNEXURE-B COPY OF THE ORDER U/S.263 DATED 2/2/2009 OF THE COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX. ANNEXURE-C COPY OF THE ORDER DATED 18/6/2010 OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH ITA NO. 127/COCH/2009. ANNEXURE-D COPY OF THE ORDER OF THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL, COCHIN BENCH FOR THE ASSESSMENT YEAR 2003-04 OF THE SOUTH INDIA CORPORATION LTD.

More judgments on Section 80IA

All 1,796 judgments and leading authorities on Section 80IA →

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →