PRINCIPAL OF INCOME TAX SHILLONG vs. M/S SAI SMELTERS INDIA LTD
What did the High Court hold?
The Tribunal, in view of the submission made by the learned standing counsel for the Income Tax Department and having regard to the ratio laid down in Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. reported in (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC), ordered the dismissal of the appeal. The Supreme Court's judgment in Meghalaya Steels Ltd. was considered to have finally decided the issue in favour of the assessee regarding the transport subsidy. The Tribunal found no necessity for further adjudication of the appeal. No specific issue was left undecided.
What were the facts?
This appeal was filed by the Principal Commissioner of Income Tax, Shillong, under Section 260A of the Income Tax Act, challenging an order related to the claim of income tax exemption for transport subsidy received by the assessee. The departmental authorities had previously held that the assessee was entitled to exemption under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act. The appeal was listed for admission before the ITAT. The Revenue, represented by its learned Senior Standing Counsel, appeared, while the respondent (assessee) was not represented.
What were the issues?
1. Whether the assessee is entitled to exemption for the transport subsidy amount under Section 80-IB and 80-IC of the Income Tax Act, 1961. The Revenue contended that the issue regarding the deduction of tax on account of transport subsidy has been finally decided by the Supreme Court in the case of Commissioner of Income Tax vs. Meghalaya Steels Ltd. reported in (2016) 383 ITR 0217 (SC). Therefore, the Revenue submitted that the adjudication of this appeal is unnecessary and that the appeal should be dismissed in light of the Supreme Court's judgment. No specific arguments were recorded for the assessee.
Which sections of the Income-tax Act were involved?
AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below
ITA 182/2017 BEFORE HON’BLE THE CHIEF JUSTICE MR. AJIT SINGH HON’BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJIT BHUYAN (Ajit Singh, CJ)
Mr. S Saikia, learned Senior Standing Counsel, Income Tax Department ass isted by Mr. DK Bagchi, learned counsel for the appellant.
None for the respondent.
Heard on admission.
This Appeal relates to the claim of income tax exemption for the transpo rt subsidy amount received by the assessee. The departmental authorities declare d that the assessee is entitled to exemption to tax under Section 80-IB and 80-I ), we order dismissal of the Appeal.
More judgments on Section 80-IB
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, Pune vs DCIT Central Circle-15 Delhi, New DelhiITA 4383/DEL/2026[2004-05]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2004-05
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, Pune vs DCIT Central Circle-15, Delhi, New DelhiITA 4382/DEL/2026[2003-04]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2003-04
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, Pune vs DCIT Central Circle-15, New DelhiITA 4381/DEL/2026[2002-03]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2002-03
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, New Delhi vs DCIT Central Circle-15, New DelhiITA 4380/DEL/2026[2001-02]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2001-02
- Zf Steering Gear (India) Limited, India vs DCIT, Central Circle - 15, DelhiITA 4379/DEL/2026[2000-01]Status: Disposed3 Sept 2026AY 2000-01
Latest GST High Court judgments
Search GST case law →- M/S B.K. Agency Under The Proprietor Of Bhola Prasad vs. The Chief Commissioner, CGSTPatna · 2 Nov 2026
- R.K.Service Station, Balasore vs. Commissioner CT And GST Odisha, CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- Tankala Soumya vs. Assistant Commissioner Of State Tax, CT And GST, Rayagada Circle, RayagadaOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Pooja, Town Hallroad, Cuttack vs. State Tax Officer, Cuttack-I West Circle,CuttackOrissa · 31 Oct 2026
- M/S Chicvogue Fashions Lip, Ganjam vs. State Tax Officer Bhubaneswar- Ii CircleOrissa · 31 Oct 2026